Standards and Guidelines

for

Management of Habitat for Late-Successional

and Old-Growth Forest Related Species

Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl

Attachment A

to the Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest Service

and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents

Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl
i

Standards and Guidelines

for Management of Habitat for Late-Successional and Old-Growth

Forest Related Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted

Owl

Attachment A to the Record of Decision for

Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management

Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl

Outline

All sections of this document, considered together, are the complete compilation of standards

and guidelines. However, these standards and guidelines are broken down into the following

sections for clarity and ease of reference.

A. Introduction - This section includes introduction, purpose, definition of the planning

area, relationship to existing agency plans, introduction to the various land allocation categories

used elsewhere in these standards and guidelines, identification of appurtenant maps, and

transition standards and guidelines.

B. Basis for Standards and Guidelines- This section includes a background

discussion of the objectives and considerations for managing for a network of terrestrial

reserves. This section also contains the Aquatic Conservation Strategy, which includes

discussions of the objectives and management emphases for Riparian Reserves, Key

Watersheds, watershed analysis, and watershed restoration.

C. Standards and Guidelines- This section includes specific standards and

guidelines applicable to all land allocation categories. It also contains descriptions of, and

standards and guidelines applicable to, all designated areas, matrix, and Key Watersheds.

D. Adaptive Management Areas - This section contains a description of the

Adaptive Management Area concept, overall objectives, and information for organizing to

accomplish those objectives. A description of each Adaptive Management Area and its

particular emphasis is included.

E. Implementation - This section includes the monitoring plan, a description of the

adaptive management process, and a description of the interagency structure to ensure

consistent and timely implementation of these standards and guidelines. The Regional

Ecosystem Office and Regional Interagency Executive Committee, referenced elsewhere in these

standards and guidelines, is described here.

F. Index - This section includes a word/topic index designed for readers who are interested in

a particular activity.
ii

Table of Contents

Standards and Guidelines

A. Introduction .................................................................. A-1

Purpose and Need for these Standards and Guidelines .................................... A-1

The Planning Area ................................................................ A-1

Relationship to Existing FS and BLM Management Plans ................................ A-2

Forest Service ............................................................. A-2

BLM ................................................................. A-2

Current Plans and Draft Plan Preferred Alternatives .............................. A-2

Consultation - Endangered Species Act ......................................... A-2

Critical Habitat for Northern Spotted Owl ...................................... A-3

Physiographic Provinces .................................................... A-3

Land Allocations ................................................................. A-4

Designated Areas and Matrix .................................................... A-4

Congressionally Reserved Areas ....................................... A-4

Late-Successional Reserves ........................................... A-4

Adaptive Management Areas .......................................... A-4

Managed Late-Successional Areas ...................................... A-4

Administratively Withdrawn Areas ..................................... A-4

Riparian Reserves ................................................... A-5

Matrix ............................................................ A-5

Key and Non-Key Watersheds ................................................... A-5

Land Allocation Hierarchy ...................................................... A-5

Standards and Guidelines ....................................................... A-6

Maps ................................................................. A-6

Transition Standards and Guidelines .............................................. A-7

B. Basis for Standards and Guidelines

Introduction .............................................................. B-1

Ecological Principles for Management of Late-Successional Forests ........................ B-1

General Ecological Basis for Forest Management ................................ B-1

Structure and Composition ............................................... B-2

Ecological Processes .................................................... B-2

Ecosystem Function .................................................... B-4

Late-Successional Reserves .................................................. B-4
iii

Role of Silviculture ........................................................ B-5

Stand Management ......................................................... B-6

Management of Disturbance Risks ............................................ B-7

Management After Natural Disturbance ........................................ B-8

Aquatic Conservation Strategy ...................................................... B-9

Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives ............................................ B-11

Components of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy ..................................... B-12

1) Riparian Reserves .......................................................... B-12

Riparian Reserve Widths ................................................... B-14

Intermittent Streams ....................................................... B-14

Wetlands ................................................................ B-16

Summary of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy for Riparian Reserves ............... B-17

2) Key Watersheds ........................................................... B-18

Roadless Areas and Key Watersheds .......................................... B-19

Summary of Aquatic Conservation Strategy for Key Watersheds ................... B-19

3) Watershed Analysis ........................................................ B-20

Summary of Aquatic Conservation Strategy for Watershed Analysis ................ B-30

4) Watershed Restoration ...................................................... B-30

Roads ................................................................ B-31

Riparian Vegetation ....................................................... B-31

In-stream Habitat Structures ................................................ B-31

Summary of Aquatic Conservation Strategy for Watershed Restoration .............. B-32

Monitoring ................................................................ B-32

C. Standards and Guidelines

Existing Laws and Regulations ............................................... C-1

Hierarchy of Standards and Guidelines ......................................... C-1

Standards and Guidelines Common to all Land Allocations ............................... C-2

Current Plans and Draft Plan Preferred Alternatives .............................. C-2

Exceptions ............................................................ C-3

Unmapped Late-Successional Reserves ........................................ C-3

Watershed Analysis ........................................................ C-3

Research ................................................................. C-4

Oregon-California Border ................................................... C-4

Survey and Manage ........................................................ C-4

Manage Recreation Areas to Minimize Disturbance to Species ...................... C-6

Protect Sites From Grazing .................................................. C-6

Standards and Guidelines for Key Watersheds .......................................... C-7

Description ............................................................... C-7

Standards and Guidelines .................................................... C-7

Standards and Guidelines for Designated Areas and Matrix ............................... C-8

Congressionally Reserved Areas ................................................. C-8

Acres ................................................................. C-8
iv

Description ............................................................... C-8

Standards and Guidelines .................................................... C-8

Late-Successional Reserves ..................................................... C-9

Acres ................................................................. C-9

Description ............................................................... C-9

1. Mapped Late-Successional Reserves ..................................... C-9

2. LS/OG 1s and 2s .................................................... C-10

3. Occupied Marbled Murrelet Sites ....................................... C-10

4. Spotted Owl Activity Centers .......................................... C-10

5. Protection Buffers ................................................... C-11

Standards and Guidelines ................................................... C-11

Objectives ........................................................ C-11

Exceptions, RNAs and recovery plans .................................. C-11

Management Assessment for Late-Successional Reserves .................. C-11

Occupied marbled murrelet sites ...................................... C-12

Silviculture .......................................................... C-12

West of Cascades .................................................. C-12

East of Cascades ................................................... C-12

 Guidelines to Reduce Risk of Large-scale Disturbance ................. C-12

Guidelines for Salvage ................................................. C-13

S & Gs for Multiple-use Activities other than Silviculture ..................... C-16

Introduction ...................................................... C-16

Road Construction and Maintenance ................................... C-16

Fuelwood Gathering ................................................ C-16

American Indian Uses .............................................. C-16

Mining .......................................................... C-17

Developments ..................................................... C-17

Land Exchanges ................................................... C-17

Habitat Improvement Projects ........................................ C-17

Range Management ................................................ C-17

Fire Suppression and Prevention ...................................... C-17

Special Forest Products ............................................. C-18

Recreational Uses .................................................. C-18

Research ......................................................... C-18

Rights-of-Way, Contracted Rights, Easements, & Special Use Permits ........ C-19

Nonnative species .................................................. C-19

Other ............................................................ C-19

Protection Buffers ..................................................... C-19

Adaptive Management Areas ................................................... C-21

Acres ................................................................ C-21

Introduction ............................................................. C-21

Selection of Adaptive Management Areas ..................................... C-22

Hierarchy of S&Gs Within Adaptive Management Areas ......................... C-22

Managed Late-Successional Areas ............................................... C-22

Acres ................................................................ C-22

Description .............................................................. C-23

1. Managed Pair Areas (E.WA & CA Cascades) ............................. C-23

2. Protection Buffers ................................................... C-23
v

Standards and Guidelines ................................................... C-26

Silviculture .......................................................... C-26

Management Assessment ............................................... C-26

Multiple-Use Activities Other Than Silviculture ............................. C-26

Protection Buffers ..................................................... C-26

Administratively Withdrawn Areas .............................................. C-29

Acres ................................................................ C-29

Description .............................................................. C-29

Standards and Guidelines ................................................... C-29

Riparian Reserves ............................................................ C-30

Acres ................................................................ C-30

Description - Riparian Reserve Widths ........................................ C-30

Standards and Guidelines ................................................... C-31

Timber Management ................................................... C-31

Roads Management .................................................... C-32

Grazing Management .................................................. C-33

Recreation Management ................................................ C-34

Minerals Management .................................................. C-34

Fire/Fuels Management ................................................. C-35

Lands ............................................................... C-36

General Riparian Area Management ....................................... C-37

Watershed and Habitat Restoration ....................................... C-37

Fish and Wildlife Management ........................................... C-37

Research ............................................................ C-38

Matrix ................................................................ C-39

Acres ................................................................ C-39

Description .............................................................. C-39

Standards and Guidelines ................................................... C-39

Provide specified amounts of coarse woody debris in matrix ................... C-40

Emphasize clumped green tree and snag retention in matrix .................... C-41

Standards and Guidelines Specific to Spotted Owl Habitat for BLM .......... C-42

Provide Additional protection for Caves, Mines, etc. for bats ................... C-43

Modify fire and pesticide use, minimize soil and litter disturbance ............... C-44

Provide for retention of old-growth fragments where little remains ............... C-44

Known Northern Spotted Owl Activity Centers .............................. C-45

Current Plans and Draft Plan Preferred Alternatives .......................... C-45

Protection Buffers ..................................................... C-45

Fire and Fuels Management ............................................. C-48

D. Adaptive Management Areas ................................................... D-1

Acres ................................................................. D-1

Introduction .............................................................. D-1

Selection of Adaptive Management Areas ...................................... D-2

Technical Objectives ....................................................... D-3

Social Objectives .......................................................... D-4

Agency Approaches and Management Review ................................... D-5
vi

Adaptive Management Area Implementation Guidelines ........................... D-5

Role of Agencies .................................................... D-5

Local Communities .................................................. D-5

Participation in Adaptive Management Areas ............................. D-6

Project Development and Implementation ................................ D-6

Area Assessment ................................................... D-6

Plan .............................................................. D-7

Monitoring and Research ............................................. D-7

Review ........................................................... D-7

Legal ............................................................. D-8

Other Issues ....................................................... D-8

Fire and Fuels Management .................................................. D-8

Timber Supply ............................................................ D-8

Education ................................................................ D-9

Standards and Guidelines .................................................... D-9

Provide additional protection for caves, mines.....roost sites for bats ............. D-10

Modify treatments, e.g. fire, pesticides, harvest to min. soil disturbance .......... D-11

Provide for old-growth fragments in watersheds where little remains ............. D-11

Hierarchy of Standards and Guidelines in Adaptive Management Areas .......... D-11

Descriptions of Adaptive Management Areas ................................... D-12

Applegate, Central Cascades ............................................ D-12

Cispus, Finney, ....................................................... D-13

Goosenest, Hayfork, Little River, ........................................ D-14

Northern Coast Range, Olympic, ......................................... D-15

Snoqualmie Pass. ...................................................... D-16

Delineation and Management of Reserved Pair Areas ............................ D-16

E. Implementation ............................................................... E-1

Introduction ................................................................. E-1

Monitoring ................................................................. E-1

Monitoring and Evaluation Plan ..................................................... E-3

Conceptual Framework ......................................................... E-3

Scope ................................................................. E-3

Relationship to Adaptive Management, Research, & Watershed Analysis ............. E-3

Adaptive Management .................................................. E-3

Research ............................................................. E-3

Watershed Analysis ..................................................... E-4

Components of the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan .................................. E-4

Types of Monitoring ....................................................... E-4

Evaluation Questions ................................................... E-4

1. Implementation Monitoring ............................................ E-4

Late-Successional Reserves ........................................... E-5

Riparian Reserves ................................................... E-5

Matrix ............................................................ E-5

Adaptive Management Areas .......................................... E-6

Key Watersheds .................................................... E-6
vii

Watershed Analysis ................................................. E-6

Participation ....................................................... E-6

2. Effectiveness Monitoring .............................................. E-6

Aquatic Ecosystems - Evaluation Question ............................... E-7

Biological diversity, Late-Succ. & Old-Growth Forest Ecosystems ............ E-8

Use Levels of Natural Resources ....................................... E-9

Rural Economies and Communities ..................................... E-9

American Indians and Their Culture .................................... E-9

3. Validation Monitoring ................................................ E-10

Special Monitoring Issues and Situations ................................... E-10

Natural and induced Environmental Stressors ............................ E-10

Rare and Declining Species .......................................... E-11

Steps to Develop an Interagency monitoring Network ................................ E-12

Adaptive Management ............................................................ E-12

Overview ............................................................... E-12

Adaptive Management Process .............................................. E-13

Interagency Coordination .......................................................... E-15

Interagency Groups ........................................................... E-15

Interagency Steering Committee ............................................. E-15

Regional Interagency Executive Committee (RIEC) .............................. E-16

Regional Ecosystem Office (REO) ........................................... E-16

Research and Monitoring Committee ......................................... E-16

Province Teams .......................................................... E-17

Planning ................................................................ E-17

Key Watersheds as a non-interchangeable component of PSQ ............... E-18

Watershed Analysis .............................................................. E-20

Information Resource Management ................................................. E-21

Consultation and Coordination ..................................................... E-21

F. References, Index, and Glossary

References F-1

Index ................................................................. F-2

Glossary ................................................................. F-4
viii

Standards and Guidelines

List of Figures

Figure A-1 Terrestrial ecosystems physiographic provinces ................................. A-3

Figure B-1 Ecological protection needs for intermittent streams, by slope

class and rock type .......................................................... B-15

Figure B-2 Relationship between levels of analysis ....................................... B-22

Figure B-3 Augusta Creek basin watershed with Riparian Reserve Scenario

1 modified by slope stability considerations ...................................... B-25

Figure B-4 Landslide potential with stream network, Augusta Creek basin,

Willamette National Forest ................................................... B-26

Figure B-5 Distribution of stream reaches with channel gradients greater than

and less than 3 degrees, Augusta Creek basin, Willamette National Forest .............. B-27

Figure B-6 Stream network for Augusta Creek watershed, Willamette National

Forest, showing high-angle tributary junctions greater than 70 degrees ................. B-28

Figure B-7 Debris flow potential for Augusta Creek basin, Willamette National

Forest, based on slope stability and potential for debris flow runout from

stream gradient and tributary junction analysis .................................... B-29

Figure E-1 Basic adaptive management model as represented in Forest Ecosystem 

Management Assessment Team Report (Appendix A of the Final SEIS) ...................... E-14

Figure E-2 Relationships of interagency groups ......................................... E-17

Figure E-3 Province planning and analysis areas ........................................ E-19

List of Tables

Table C-1 Annual home range areas of northern spotted owl pairs in different

states, physiographic provinces, and study areas ................................. C-24

Table C-2 Amounts of old-growth and mature forest in annual pair home ranges

of spotted owls, by state, physiographic provinces, and study areas .................. C-25

Table C-3 Species to be protected through survey and management standards and

guidelines. Each of the four survey strategies is described in the text ................. C-49
Introduction A-1

Standards and Guidelines

for

Management of Habitat for Late-Successional and Old-Growth

Forest Related Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl

Attachment A to the Record of Decision for

Amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management

Planning Documents Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl

A. Introduction

This document is attached to and a part of the Record of Decision for Amendments to Forest

Service and Bureau of Land Management Planning Documents Within the Range of the

Northern Spotted Owl, 1994. It presents a combination of land allocations managed primarily to

protect and enhance habitat for late-successional and old-growth forest related species, and

standards and guidelines for the management of the land allocations. Except as identified

elsewhere in the Record of Decision or otherwise changed since the Final SEIS was released,

these standards and guidelines are intended to be consistent with those of Alternative 9 in the

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (February 1994).

Purpose and Need for these Standards and Guidelines

The purpose, which includes President Clinton's mandate and principles as expressed at the April

2, 1993, Forest Conference, is to take an ecosystem management approach to forest management,

with support from scientific evidence; meet the requirements of existing laws and regulations;

maintain a healthy forest ecosystem with habitat that will support populations of native species

(particularly those associated with late-successional and old-growth forests), including protection

for riparian areas and waters; and maintain a sustainable supply of timber and other forest

products that will help maintain the stability of local and regional economies on a predictable and

long-term basis.

The Planning Area

These standards and guidelines apply to lands administered by the USDA Forest Service and the

USDI Bureau of Land Management within the range of the northern spotted owl. These lands are

located in Washington, Oregon, and northern California. While the influence of lands

administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and Department of

Defense, as well as private, state, and tribal lands, was considered in these standards and

guidelines, no new management direction for them is presented here. These standards and

guidelines assume these other federal lands will be managed according to existing management

plans and applicable federal law.
Introduction A-2

Relationship to Existing Forest Service and BLM Plans

The direction established by these standards and guidelines (as an attachment to the Record of

Decision) is added to the existing management direction for those administrative units without

adopted Forest or District Plans, and will supersede management direction contained in existing

plans where it differs for specific resources or areas, except as otherwise specifically provided.

Standards and guidelines and land allocations in the existing plans not directly superseded will

remain in effect. These standards and guidelines and land allocations will be incorporated into

plans which are being developed. Resource management and the quantity of timber offered for

sale will reflect the implications of these standards and guidelines and the land allocations.

Additional agency details are provided below. 

Forest Service 

These standards and guidelines amend the Pacific Northwest and Pacific Southwest Regional

Guides. They amend the standards and guidelines of approved National Forest Land and

Resource Management Plans. For those National Forests without approved Forest Plans

(Klamath, Shasta-Trinity, Six Rivers, and Mendocino), these standards and guidelines apply

directly to management activities, and will be incorporated into Forest Plans as they are

developed. 

Bureau of Land Management

The existing plans for the Redding Resource Area, the Arcata Resource Area, and the King Range

National Conservation Area of the Ukiah District, as well as the Management Framework Plans

for western Oregon Districts, are amended by the direction established in these standards and

guidelines. These standards and guidelines supplement the BLM Draft Resource Management

Plans of August 1992 for the Salem, Eugene, Coos Bay, Roseburg, and Medford Districts, and

the Klamath Falls Resource Area of the Lakeview District, and the seven alternatives considered

in the Draft EISs appurtenant to those plans.

Current Plans and Draft Plan Preferred Alternatives

Although these standards and guidelines supplement existing plans, they also incorporate certain

standards and guidelines from Draft National Forest Plans and the revised Draft BLM Resource

Management Plans. When these standards and guidelines were prepared, beginning in April 1993,

BLM Districts and National Forests either had completed (current) Forest and Resource

Management Plans, or they were in the process of developing such plans. For those units that had

not completed their plans, the then-current version, or draft, of the unit's preferred alternative was

identified (see page C-2). These current plans and draft plan preferred alternatives were used as

the base or starting point for these standards and guidelines. Therefore, except as specifically

excepted (see page C-3), standards and guidelines from current plans and draft plan preferred

alternatives apply where they are more restrictive or provide greater benefits to late-successional

forest related species than the provisions of these standards and guidelines.

Consultation - Endangered Species Act

Management direction and land allocations of these standards and guidelines are intended to 
constitute the Forest Service and BLM contribution to the recovery of the northern spotted owl.

Actions proposed to implement these standards and guidelines will undergo consultation, either

formal or informal, as appropriate. Consultation for the northern spotted owl is not required for

activities consistent with these standards and guidelines if those activities will not result in

incidental take. Consultation that may be required but that does not involve take is expected to be

informal. Where incidental take would occur, incidental take statements will be provided through

formal consultation.

Critical Habitat for Northern Spotted Owl

In January 1992, the Fish and Wildlife Service determined the lands that comprise critical habitat

for the northern spotted owl. The Fish and Wildlife Service may review and revise its critical

habitat designation for the northern spotted owl, based upon the provisions of these standards and

guidelines. In the interim, the combination of, and standards and guidelines for, Late-Successional

Reserves, Managed Late-Successional Areas, Riparian Reserves, and matrix, should allow critical

habitat to perform the biological function for which it was designated. Any site-specific

considerations of critical habitat in the matrix are considered minimal and will be evaluated

through watershed analysis and addressed in area-specific plans, as appropriate.

Physiographic Provinces

Portions of these standards and guidelines, particularly those

for silvicultural treatments, refer to one or more

physiographic provinces. The use of provinces allows

differentiation between areas of common biological and

physical processes. The twelve physiographic provinces

used in these standards and guidelines are shown in Figure

A-1.

Figure A-1. Terrestrial ecosystems physiographic provinces

1. WA Olympic Peninsula

2. WA Western Lowlands

3. WA Western Cascades

4. WA Eastern Cascades

5. OR Western Cascades

6. OR Eastern Cascades

7. OR Coast Range

8. OR Willamette Valley

9. OR Klamath

10. CA Klamath

11. CA Coast Range

12. CA Cascades.

These provinces differ from the planning provinces which

extend outside the range of the northern spotted owl, and are

based more on major river basins (see Section E of these

standards and guidelines).
Introduction A-4

Land Allocations

Designated Areas and Matrix

All 24.4 million acres of Forest Service, BLM, and other federally-administered lands within

the range of the northern spotted owl are allocated to one of the following six designated areas

or to matrix.

Congressionally Reserved Areas - This

includes Wildernesses, Wild and Scenic Rivers,

National Monuments, as well as other federal

lands not administered by the Forest Service or

BLM.

Late-Successional Reserves - Late-Successional

Reserves are identified with an objective to

protect and enhance conditions of latesuccessional and old-growth forest ecosystems,

which serve as habitat for late-successional and

old-growth forest related species including the

northern spotted owl. Limited stand management

is permitted, subject to review by the Regional

Ecosystem Office.

Adaptive Management Areas - Ten Adaptive

Management Areas are identified, each with an

objective to develop and test new management

approaches to integrate and achieve ecological

and economic health, and other social objectives.

Managed Late-Successional Areas - Managed

Late-Successional Areas are similar to LateSuccessional Reserves but are identified for

certain owl locations in the drier provinces where

regular and frequent fire is a natural part of the

ecosystem. Certain silvicultural treatments and

fire hazard reduction treatments are allowed to

help prevent complete stand destruction from

large catastrophic events such as high intensity,

high severity fires; or disease or insect epidemics.

Administratively Withdrawn Areas - Administratively Withdrawn Areas are identified in

current Forest and District Plans or draft plan preferred alternatives and include recreation and

visual areas, back country, and other areas where management emphasis precludes scheduled

timber harvest.
Introduction A-5

Riparian Reserves - As a key element of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy (see Section B of

these standards and guidelines), the Riparian Reserves provide an area along all streams,

wetlands, ponds, lakes, and unstable and potentially unstable areas where riparian-dependent

resources receive primary emphasis. Riparian Reserves are important to the terrestrial

ecosystem as well, serving, for example, as dispersal habitat for certain terrestrial species.

Matrix - The matrix consists of those federal lands outside the six categories of designated

areas listed above.

Key and Non-Key Watersheds

All 24.455 million acres of Forest Service, BLM, and other federally-administered lands within

the range of the northern spotted owl are also allocated to one of three watershed categories:

Tier 1 Key Watersheds, Tier 2 Key Watersheds, or non-Key Watersheds (all others). Key

Watersheds overlay portions of all six categories of designated areas and matrix, and place

additional management requirements or emphasis on activities in those areas. 

There are 8,119,400 acres of Tier 1 Key Watersheds, and 1,001,700 acres of Tier 2 Key

Watersheds. Key Watersheds overlay the land allocations of designated areas and matrix as

shown below.

Acres in each designated area and matrix, by Key and non-Key Watersheds.

 Tier 1 Tier 2 non-Key Total

Designated Areas

 Congressionally Reserved Areas 2,728,000 311,200 4,281,400 7,320,600

 Late-Successional Reserves 3,151,700 279,100 4,000,000 7,430,800

 Adaptive Management Areas 228,100 60,600 1,233,100 1,521,800

 Managed Late-Successional Areas 55,100 0 47,100 102,200

 Administratively Withdrawn Areas 407,900 54,700 1,014,500 1,477,100

 Riparian Reserves (based on samples) 631,000 113,700 1,882,800 2,627,500

Matrix

 Matrix 917,600 182,400 2,875,300 3,975,300

Total 8,119,400 1,001,700 15,334,200 24,455,300

Land Allocation Hierarchy

There is considerable overlap between some designated areas. For example, there are 4.1

million acres of Administratively Withdrawn Areas identified in current plans and draft plan

preferred alternatives. A substantial portion of this, however, is included within LateSuccessional Reserves. Similarly, Late-Successional Reserves contain streams, and thus

Riparian Reserves. For consistency and acreage display purposes, such overlaps are displayed in

only one category according to the following hierarchy.

(1) Congressionally Reserved Areas, (2) Late-Successional Reserves, (3) Adaptive

Management Areas, (4) Managed Late-Successional Areas, (5) Administratively

Withdrawn Areas, (6) Riparian Reserves, and (7) Matrix.
Introduction A-6

Note as a result of this hierarchy, there are land allocation categories that are not completely

represented by acreage figures listed in these standards and guidelines. For example,

Administratively Withdrawn Areas within Late-Successional Reserves are shown only in the

Late-Successional Reserve category. The calculation of Riparian Reserves is done after all

other designated areas; therefore, acres shown for Riparian Reserves only reflect those

Riparian Reserves that are interspersed throughout the matrix. In practice, where overlaps

occur, the standards and guidelines of both allocations apply.

Note also that Key and non-Key Watersheds are not part of this hierarchy, because their

designations overlap, and do not preclude, all of the above categories. Therefore, there are

acres of all categories of designated areas and matrix both inside and outside Key

Watersheds, as shown above.

Standards and Guidelines

Designated areas, matrix, and Key Watersheds all have specific management direction

regarding how those lands are to be managed, including actions that are prohibited and

descriptions of the conditions that should occur there. This management direction is known

as “standards and guidelines”— the rules and limits governing actions, and the principles

specifying the environmental conditions or levels to be achieved and maintained. Although

the direction in all sections of this document constitutes standards and guidelines, standards

and guidelines specific to particular land allocation categories, or relative to specific types of

management activities, are included in Section C of these standards and guidelines.

Additional direction to management agencies includes, but is not limited to directives,

policy, handbooks, manuals, as well as other plans, regulations, laws and treaties. The

standards and guidelines presented here supersede other direction except treaties, laws, and

regulations unless that direction is more restrictive or provides greater benefits to latesuccessional forest related species. These standards and guidelines do not apply where they

would be contrary to existing law or regulation, or where they would require the agencies to

take actions for which they do not have authority.

Maps

The essential features of these standards and guidelines are shown on maps as follows.

Key Watersheds, Marbled Murrelet Zones 1 and 2, the five terrestrial designated areas,

matrix, and samples of the Riparian Reserves, are shown on the 1:500,000 scale map

included with the Final SEIS (1994).

Maps at 1/2-inch to the mile scale showing all of the above elements are available for

each Forest Service and BLM administrative unit at the individual unit offices.

The official maps of the elements of these standards and guidelines are maintained as part

of the administrative record and are also stored electronically in the Spatially Unified

Database (SPUD) maintained by the Interagency Geographic Information System (GIS)

staff in the Regional Ecosystem Office at 333 SW 1st St., Portland, OR 97204.

To more accurately define the zone in which marbled murrelet surveys are required, the

marbled murrelet zone is being remapped in some areas to more closely parallel the 
Introduction A-7

coastline, consistent with the narrative description of these zones on page C-10 of these

standards and guidelines.

Transition Standards and Guidelines

As described in the Record of Decision, the following direction is adopted to provide for

implementation of certain interim procedures in order to realize the goals and objectives of

the management strategy while making project decisions with reasonable promptness that do

not preclude long-term options or impair resources sought to be protected.

1. Watershed Analysis - In the initial years of implementation, the process for watershed

analysis is expected to evolve to meet long-term goals described in these standards and

guidelines. However, some projects proposed for the first few years of implementation are in

areas that require watershed analysis prior to approval of the projects (i.e., Key Watersheds,

Riparian Reserves, and inventoried roadless areas). In F.Y.s 1994-96, watershed analysis

done for these projects may be less detailed than analyses that are completed in later years.

Regardless, analysis done during the initial years (F.Y. 1994-96) will comply with the

following guidance:

- The goal of the analysis is to determine whether the proposed actions are consistent

with the objectives of the standards and guidelines.

- Existing information will be used to the greatest extent possible, with new information

collected, to the maximum extent practicable, to fill crucial data gaps.

- Analysis will address the entire watershed, even though some areas may be analyzed at

a lower level of precision, and the analysis of issues may be prioritized.

- Information from the analysis will flow into the NEPA documentation for specific

projects, and will be used where practicable to facilitate Endangered Species Act and Clean

Water Act compliance.

- Restoration opportunities will be identified.

As described elsewhere in these standards and guidelines, watershed analysis is an ongoing,

iterative process. Watershed analyses will expand as appropriate to consider additional

available information, changing conditions and potential effects associated with long-term

management issues and needed actions.

2. Green Tree Retention Requirements - National forest timber sales already laid out at the

time of the Record of Decision may use green tree retention requirements in the Draft SEIS

if this eliminates the need to rework, redesign, or recruise a sale. All sales laid out after the

date of the Record of Decision will comply with green tree retention requirements in these

standards and guidelines.

3. Assessments for Late-Successional Reserves - Projects and activities within LateSuccessional Reserves (including restoration, recreation, projects for public safety, thinning

and salvage) may proceed in fiscal years 1994-96 using initial Late-Successional Reserve

assessments done at a level of detail sufficient to assess whether the activities are consistent

with the objectives of the Late-Successional Reserves.
Basis for Standards and.. B-1

B. Basis for Standards and Guidelines

Introduction

This section of the standards and guidelines is adapted from the FEMAT Report to provide

additional information on the objectives and assumptions regarding management to protect

and enhance habitat for late-successional and old-growth forest related species, and to protect

and enhance riparian ecosystems. It clarifies the intent of the standards and guidelines in

order to provide guidance for situations not specifically covered by the standards and

guidelines. It has two primary parts: (1) Ecological Principles for Management of LateSuccessional Forests (below), and (2) the Aquatic Conservation Strategy (beginning on page

B-9). 

Ecological Principles for Management of

Late-Successional Forests

General Ecological Basis for Forest Management

Late-successional forests are those forest seral stages that include mature and old-growth age

classes. One goal of these standards and guidelines is to maintain late-successional and oldgrowth species habitat and ecosystems on federal lands. Another goal of forest management

on federal lands is to maintain biological diversity associated with native species and

ecosystems in accordance with laws and regulations. Forest ecosystems are quite variable

throughout the range of the northern spotted owl. Therefore, site-specific knowledge of

ecosystems will be incorporated into watershed-level analysis and integrated into Forest and

District plans and province-level planing.

In Late-Successional Reserves, standards and guidelines are designed to maintain latesuccessional forest ecosystems and protect them from loss due to large-scale fire, insect and

disease epidemics, and major human impacts. The intent is to maintain natural ecosystem

processes such as gap dynamics, natural regeneration, pathogenic fungal activity, insect

herbivory, and low-intensity fire. These standards and guidelines encourage the use of

silvicultural practices to accelerate the development of overstocked young plantations into

stands with late-successional and old-growth forest characteristics, and to reduce the risk to

Late-Successional Reserves from severe impacts resulting from large-scale disturbances and

unacceptable loss of habitat.

The matrix is an integral part of the management direction included in these standards and

guidelines. Production of timber and other commodities is an important objective for the

matrix. However, forests in the matrix function as connectivity between Late-Successional

Reserves and provide habitat for a variety of organisms associated with both late-
Basis for Standards and.. B-2

successional and younger forests. Standards and guidelines for the matrix are designed to

provide for important ecological functions such as dispersal of organisms, carryover of some

species from one stand to the next, and maintenance of ecologically valuable structural

components such as down logs, snags, and large trees. The matrix will also add ecological

diversity by providing early-successional habitat.

Structure and Composition

The structure and composition of late-successional and old-growth forest ecosystems have

been detailed in numerous publications. Four major structural attributes of old-growth

Douglas-fir forests are: live old-growth trees, standing dead trees (snags), fallen trees or logs

on the forest floor, and logs in streams. Additional important elements typically include

multiple canopy layers, smaller understory trees, canopy gaps, and patchy understory.

Structural characteristics of late-successional and old-growth forests vary with vegetation

type, disturbance regime, and developmental stage. For example, in many Douglas-fir stands

in western Oregon and Washington, the mature phase of stand development begins around 80

years and is characterized by relatively large live and dead trees, although multiple canopy

layers may not yet be well developed. In some forest types subject to frequent, low-intensity

fire, such as ponderosa pine, the late-successional and old-growth stages are typically

characterized by relatively open understories and relatively few large fallen trees (in

comparison to more moist Douglas-fir/western hemlock types). Standards and guidelines

designed to promote the desired conditions vary among physiographic provinces because

characteristics of the natural structure and composition of late-successional and old-growth

forests also vary among the provinces. 

Ecological Processes

Ecological processes include those natural changes that are essential for the development and

maintenance of late-successional and old-growth forest ecosystems. Although the processes

that created the current late-successional and old-growth ecosystems are not completely

understood, they include: (1) tree growth and maturation, (2) death and decay of large trees,

(3) low-to-moderate intensity disturbances (e.g., fire, wind, insects, and diseases) that create

canopy openings or gaps in the various strata of vegetation, (4) establishment of trees

beneath the maturing overstory trees either in gaps or under the canopy, and (5) closing of

canopy gaps by lateral canopy growth or growth of understory trees. These processes result in

forests moving through different stages of late-successional and old-growth conditions that

may span 80 to 1,200 years for forests dominated by long-lived species. 

Several authors have described these stages, and one has expanded these descriptions to

include the protracted nature of stand development in forests dominated by long-lived trees

such as Douglas-fir. Following stand-replacing disturbance, these stages can be described as:

(1) establishment, (2) thinning, (3) maturation, (4) transition, and (5) shifting gap.

The maturation stage (3) is characterized by a slowed rate of height growth and crown

expansion. Heavy limbs begin to form; gaps between crowns become larger and more stable,

or expand as a result of insect and pathogen mortality. Large dead and fallen trees begin to 
Basis for Standards and.. B-3

accumulate, and the understory may be characterized by seedlings and saplings of shadetolerant tree species. In Douglas-fir stands west of the Cascade Range, this stage typically

begins between 80 and 140 years, depending on site conditions and stand history. 

During the transition stage (4), the original component of overstory trees approaches its

maximum height and diameter, and growth is slow. Tree crowns become more open, irregular

in shape and contain heavy limbs. Broken, dead, and decaying portions of tree crowns are

common. Old trees become relatively resistant to low-to-moderate intensity fire and,

depending on species, crown bases are high above the understory and bark is relatively thick.

During this stage, understory trees form multiple canopy layers. Coarse woody debris

accumulates to relatively high levels, and low-to-moderate intensity disturbances from

insects, diseases, wind, and fire create patchy openings and accumulations of standing dead

trees. These disturbances also frequently promote establishment or advancement of

understory trees that eventually fill the holes in the canopy. In Douglas-fir stands west of the

Cascade Range, this stage begins between 150 to 250 years, and may last for an additional

300 to 600 years depending on site conditions and species. 

The shifting-gap stages begin when the last of the original component of overstory oldgrowth trees dies and all trees in the canopy have been established following various smaller

gap-type disturbances. Forests in the last two stages of development (4 and 5) actually

contain all of the stand developmental stages in a relatively fine-grained mosaic of smaller

stands. The later three stages (3, 4, and 5) embody the late-successional and old-growth

conditions that are the focus of these standards and guidelines. 

Some of the stand development processes, such as tree growth and mortality, and understory

establishment, can be accelerated through silvicultural manipulations in younger stands.

Other processes such as tree crown maturation, bark thickening, and tree bole decay are not

readily accelerated through silviculture. Because of limitations in knowledge of latesuccessional and old-growth forest processes and lack of silvicultural experience in old

stands, it is not certain that old-growth ecosystems can be completely replicated.

Most of the current late-successional and old-growth stands developed from natural

regeneration following wildfire events that occurred during the last 500 to 600 years. These

fires covered large areas--frequently many thousands of acres. Although these fires were

large, they burned in patches of variable intensity and severity, and left many areas of

unburned or lightly burned forest. The natural regime of patchy fires that leave an abundance

of large dead trees and lesser amounts of scattered live trees, as individuals and in patches, is

the basis for silvicultural methods such as retention of green trees as individuals and in

patches. 

In some cases, however, natural reburns occurred, resulting in relatively little carryover of live

trees as a legacy from the old-growth condition. Where considerable live and dead material

was left following fires, young stands contained many old-growth structures and presumably

old-growth associated organisms, including organisms associated with coarse woody debris

on the forest floor. 

Large fires and relatively long fire return intervals in the moist northern and western 
Basis for Standards and.. B-4

physiographic provinces resulted in periods during which landscapes contained large areas of

relatively unbroken forest cover. In the warmer, drier physiographic provinces (i.e., the

Washington and Oregon Eastern Cascades, the California Cascades, and the Oregon and

California Klamath Provinces), fire is more frequent, less intense, and is an integral part of

the internal dynamics of a typical stand (tens to hundreds of acres). In the drier provinces, fire

control and timber harvest have decreased the abundance of some types of old growth, such

as ponderosa pine, that are dependent on frequent, low-intensity fires. Other types of latesuccessional forest that are less fire resistant or are less desirable for harvest have become

more widely distributed. In these areas, the potential for stand-replacing wildfires has

increased, resulting in a higher risk to the stability of current stands reserved for latesuccessional species. 

At a landscape scale and spanning long periods of time, stand-replacing wildfires have an

important role in resetting successional processes and developing new areas of latesuccessional forests to replace those lost through succession or disturbance. Silvicultural

practices designed to imitate natural processes may be able to reset succession to achieve

stand and landscape-level goals. This type of silviculture may meet a variety of ecosystem

objectives. However, experience in applying silviculture for late-successional objectives is

limited. Until more experience and knowledge about active management to produce latesuccessional ecosystems is gained, sustaining late-successional ecosystems in the landscape

will be best accomplished through retention of existing areas of late-successional forest.

Given the relatively low remaining proportion of late-successional ecosystems in the

landscape at the present time, these older forests should be protected from fire and other

stand-resetting disturbances. 

Ecosystem Functions

Late-successional ecosystems perform several ecological functions that appear to be lacking,

or less well developed, in younger natural forests and managed plantations. These functions

include buffering microclimates during seasonal climatic extremes, producing food for those

consumer organisms that occupy late-successional forests, storing carbon, providing nutrient

and hydrological cycling, and providing sources of arthropod predators and organisms

beneficial to other ecosystems or successional stages. Old-growth ecosystems appear to have

high retention of nutrients and low soil erosion potential, although differences in these

functions between stand developmental stages may not be large when canopy closure has

occurred. Tall, deep canopies of late-successional forests can also intercept more moisture

from clouds and fog than young plantations. 

Late-Successional Reserves

These standards and guidelines include reserves designed to maintain and enhance latesuccessional forests as a network of existing old-growth forest ecosystems, although their

size, distribution, and management varies. These reserves represent a network of existing oldgrowth forests that are retained in their natural condition with natural processes, such as fire,

allowed to function to the extent possible. The reserves are designed to serve a number of

purposes. First, they provide a distribution, quantity, and quality of old-growth forest 
Basis for Standards and.. B-5

habitat sufficient to avoid foreclosure of future management options. Second, they provide

habitat for populations of species that are associated with late-successional forests. Third,

they will help ensure that late-successional species diversity will be conserved. 

Late-successional forest communities are the result of a unique interaction of disturbance,

regeneration, succession, and climate that can never be recreated in their entirety through

management. The structure, species composition, and function of these forests are, in their

entirety, not fully understood. However, silvicultural restoration in early-successional forests

can accelerate the development of some of the structural and compositional features of latesuccessional forests. Because early-successional forests will regenerate by different processes

during a different time period than existing late-successional forests, silviculturally created

stands may look and function differently from current old-growth stands that developed over

the last 1,000 years. Consequently, conservation of a network of natural old-growth stands

maintains biodiversity into the future. 

Desired late-successional and old-growth characteristics that will be created as younger

stands change through successional development include: (1) multispecies and multilayered

assemblages of trees, (2) moderate-to-high accumulations of large logs and snags, (3)

moderate-to-high canopy closure, (4) moderate-to-high numbers of trees with physical

imperfections such as cavities, broken tops, and large deformed limbs, and (5) moderate-tohigh accumulations of fungi, lichens, and bryophytes. Although they may not be duplicates of

existing old-growth forests, these stands could provide adequate habitat for many species in

the long term. 

The Role of Silviculture

Silviculture is the art and science of managing forest stands to provide or maintain structures,

species composition, and growth rates that contribute to forest management goals.

Silvicultural practices under these standards and guidelines will vary considerably because of

the broad variety of forest species and ecosystems within the range of the northern spotted

owl. The ecosystems range from coastal temperate rain forests where fire occurs infrequently,

but where wind may have a major impact, to forests on dry interior sites where disturbance by

wildfires and insects is common. Within specific locales, the silvicultural practices will be

strongly influenced by such factors as nearby residential areas, local wildlife habitat

requirements, and fire management constraints. 

Silvicultural systems proposed for Late-Successional Reserves have two principal objectives:

(1) development of old-growth forest characteristics including snags, logs on the forest floor,

large trees, and canopy gaps that enable establishment of multiple tree layers and diverse

species composition; and (2) prevention of large-scale disturbances by fire, wind, insects, and

diseases that would destroy or limit the ability of the reserves to sustain viable forest species

populations. Small-scale disturbances by these agents are natural processes, and will be

allowed to continue. 

Matrix objectives for silviculture should include: (1) production of commercial yields of

wood, including those species such as Pacific yew and western red cedar that require 
Basis for Standards and.. B-6

extended rotations, (2) retention of moderate levels of ecologically valuable old-growth

components such as snags, logs, and relatively large green trees, and (3) increasing ecological

diversity by providing early-successional habitat.

Stand Management

Forests within Late-Successional Reserves are composed of managed stands from 2 to more

than 80 years old, as well as unmanaged, late-successional, and old-growth stands. The

younger stands were usually established following fire or timber harvest. Some of these

stands will develop old-growth characteristics without silvicultural intervention. However,

current stocking and structure of some of these stands were established to produce high yields

of timber, not to provide for old-growth-like forests. Consequently, silviculture can accelerate

the development of young stands into multilayered stands with large trees and diverse plant

species, and structures that may, in turn, maintain or enhance species diversity.

Stand management in Late-Successional Reserves should focus on stands that have been

regenerated following timber harvest or stands that have been thinned. These include stands

that will acquire late-successional characteristics more rapidly with treatment, or are prone to

fire, insects, diseases, wind, or other disturbances that would jeopardize the reserve.

Depending on stand conditions, treatments could include, but should not be limited to: (1)

thinning or managing the overstory to produce large trees; release advanced regeneration of

conifers, hardwoods, or other plants; or reduce risk from fire, insects, diseases, or other

environmental variables; (2) underplanting and limiting understory vegetation control to

begin development of multistory stands; (3) killing trees to make snags and coarse woody

debris; (4) reforestation; and (5) use of prescribed fire. Thinning prescriptions should

encourage development of diverse stands with large trees and a variety of species in the

overstory and understory. Prescriptions should vary within and among stands.

Stands in the matrix can be managed for timber and other commodity production, and to

perform an important role in maintaining biodiversity. Silvicultural treatments of forest

stands in the matrix can provide for retention of old-growth ecosystem components such as

large green trees, snags and down logs, and depending on site and forest type, can provide for

a diversity of species. Retention of green trees following timber harvest in the matrix

provides a legacy that bridges past and future forests. Retaining green trees serves several

important functions including snag recruitment, promoting multistoried canopies, and

providing shade and suitable habitat for many organisms in the matrix. 

Retaining green trees of various sizes, ages, and species, in well-distributed patches as well as

dispersed individuals, will promote species diversity. These trees may also act as refugia or

centers of dispersal for many organisms including plants, fungi, lichens, small vertebrates,

and arthropods. Patches of trees may provide protection for special microsites such as seeps,

wetlands, or rocky outcrops. Trees retained within the Riparian Reserves can contribute to

overall retention objectives, but will generally not be sufficiently dispersed across the

landscape to fully satisfy these objectives. Diversity of tree structure should be considered

when selecting trees for retention. Complex canopy structure and especially leaning boles are

beneficial for some lichens. Trees that are asymmetrical provide a diversity of habitat 
Basis for Standards and.. B-7

substrates, and often have more lichen and moss epiphytes on large lateral limbs than

symmetrical trees. Location of green trees is also important (e.g., ridgelines are optimal

locations for lichen dispersal).

Coarse woody debris is essential for many species of vascular plants, fungi, liverworts,

mosses, lichens, arthropods, salamanders, reptiles and small mammals. Because of drier

microclimates, logs in the matrix may be occupied by species different from those found on

coarse woody debris in late-successional forests. However, these logs may provide

transitional islands for the maintenance and eventual recovery of some late-successional

organisms in the matrix. 

Adequate numbers of large snags and green trees are especially critical for bats because these

trees are used for maternity roosts, temporary night roosts, day roosts, and hibernacula. Large

snags and green trees should be well distributed throughout the matrix because bats compete

with primary excavators and other species that use cavities. Day and night roosts are often

located at different sites, and migrating bats may roost under bark in small groups. Thermal

stability within a roost site is important for bats, and large snags and green trees provide that

stability. Individual bat colonies may use several roosts during a season as temperature and

weather conditions change. Large, down logs with loose bark may also be used by some bats

for roosting.

Management of Disturbance Risks

Natural disturbance is an important process within late-successional forest ecosystems, but

humans have altered the disturbance regimes. Management may be required to reintroduce

natural disturbance, such as fire, or to minimize socially unacceptable impacts. Fire

suppression has resulted in significant increases in accumulated fuels within some forests,

particularly in the Washington and Oregon Eastern Cascades Provinces, the California

Cascades Province, and the Oregon and California Klamath Provinces. At the same time,

these forests may have become much more vulnerable to insects and diseases.

In Late-Successional Reserves in the Washington Western Cascades and coastal areas of

Oregon and Washington, manipulation of natural stands to reduce fire hazard is generally not

necessary due to a lower occurrence of fire. However, fuel management may be desirable in

plantations. 

In Late-Successional Reserves in the Eastern Cascades or Klamath Provinces, silviculture

aimed at reducing the risk of stand-replacing fires may be appropriate. Treatments may

include thinning and underburning. Due to fire suppression, some forests have become quite

dense and multistoried, primarily from the invasion of shade-tolerant species. Density

reduction in mid-level canopy layers by thinning may reduce the probability of crown fires. 

Underburning can be used to reduce fuel loading and vertical fuel continuity. Wildfires in

stands that are managed using underburning are generally less severe, and fire suppression is

aided. To increase effectiveness, underburning should be implemented over large areas. Such

activities in older stands in westside provinces may be warranted when levels of fire 
Basis for Standards and.. B-8

risk are high. Compartmentalized landscape units of reduced fuel allow safe access for fire

suppression crews and provide strategic locations for efficient and effective fire suppression.

Stands are manipulated to reduce continuity of canopies, boles are pruned on residual trees,

and significant quantities of understory fuels are removed. Many of these treatments may

reduce the quality of habitat for late-successional organisms. Thus, managers need to seek a

balanced approach that reduces risk of fire while protecting large areas of fire-prone latesuccessional forest. 

Silvicultural systems within the matrix contribute to management of the Late-Successional

Reserves. Fire and fuels management in the matrix can reduce the risk of fire and other largescale disturbances that would jeopardize the reserves. Harvesting trees immediately adjacent

to Late-Successional Reserves may result in increased wind damage along boundaries. In

such cases, "feathering" stands within harvest units may be appropriate to reduce this risk.

Local expertise will be essential in designing meaningful strategies for wind protection. 

Management After Natural Disturbance

Fire, wind, insects, and diseases have greatly influenced the development of Pacific

Northwest forests. Fine-scale disturbances, generally by insects or diseases, cause deaths of

single trees or small groups of trees which result in small patches of early-successional

vegetation embedded in a larger portion of older forest. Coarse-scale disturbances, such as

fire and wind, result in more extensive areas of early-successional vegetation. Many native

forest organisms have adapted to these cycles and scales of disturbance and regrowth.

These standards and guidelines have provisions for management following natural

disturbances in Late-Successional Reserves. Direct silvicultural management is appropriate

following disturbances such as extensive, high-severity fires. Smaller scale disturbances, such

as those caused by insects, diseases, and wind, create small gaps in the overstory that

characterize the transition and shifting-gap stages of old-growth forest development.

Tree mortality is an important and natural process within a forest ecosystem. Diseased and

damaged trees and logs are key structural components of late-successional and old-growth

forests. Salvage of dead trees affects the development of future stands and habitat quality for

a number of organisms. Snag removal may result in long-term influences on forest stands

because large snags are not produced in natural stands until trees become large and begin to

die from natural mortality. Snags are used extensively by cavity-nesting birds and mammals

such as woodpeckers, nuthatches, chickadees, squirrels, red tree voles, and American marten.

Removal of snags following disturbance can reduce the carrying capacity for these species for

many years.

Coarse woody debris is a necessary component of forest ecosystems. This wood provides

habitat for a broad array of vertebrates, invertebrates, fungi, mosses, vascular plants, and

micro-organisms. Arthropods, salamanders, reptiles, and small mammals live in or under

logs; woodpeckers forage on them; and vascular plants and fungi grow on rotting logs.

Provision for retention of snags and logs normally should be made, at least until the new 
Basis for Standards and.. B-9

stand begins to contribute coarse woody debris.

Many natural disturbances do not result in complete mortality of stands. For example, recent

fires in the Oregon Western Cascades Province killed 25 to 50 percent of trees within the

areas burned, leaving 50 to 75 percent of the stands intact. The surviving trees are important

elements of the new stand. They provide structural diversity and provide a potential source of

additional large snags during the development of new stands. Furthermore, trees injured by

disturbance may develop cavities, deformed crowns, and limbs which are habitat components

for a variety of wildlife species.

In the matrix, objectives for management after stand-replacing events will generally differ

from those for Late-Successional Reserves. Economic benefits of timber production will

receive greater consideration. For example, the commercial salvage of dead trees will be less

constrained, and replanting disturbed areas will be a high priority.

Aquatic Conservation Strategy

The Aquatic Conservation Strategy was developed to restore and maintain the ecological

health of watersheds and aquatic ecosystems contained within them on public lands. The

strategy would protect salmon and steelhead habitat on federal lands managed by the Forest

Service and Bureau of Land Management within the range of Pacific Ocean anadromy. 

This conservation strategy employs several tactics to approach the goal of maintaining the

“natural” disturbance regime. Land use activities need to be limited or excluded in those parts

of the watershed prone to instability. The distribution of land use activities, such as timber

harvest or roads, must minimize increases in peak streamflows. Headwater riparian areas

need to be protected, so that when debris slides and flows occur they contain coarse woody

debris and boulders necessary for creating habitat farther downstream. Riparian areas along

larger channels need protection to limit bank erosion, ensure an adequate and continuous

supply of coarse woody debris to channels, and provide shade and microclimate protection.

Watersheds currently containing the best habitat or those with the greatest potential for

recovery should receive increased protection and receive highest priority for restoration

programs.

Any species-specific strategy aimed at defining explicit standards for habitat elements would

be insufficient for protecting even the targeted species. The Aquatic Conservation Strategy

must strive to maintain and restore ecosystem health at watershed and landscape scales to

protect habitat for fish and other riparian-dependent species and resources and restore

currently degraded habitats. This approach seeks to prevent further degradation and restore

habitat over broad landscapes as opposed to individual projects or small watersheds. Because

it is based on natural disturbance processes, it may take decades, possibly more than a

century, to accomplish all of its objectives. Some improvements in aquatic ecosystems,

however, can be expected in 10 to 20 years.

The important phrases in these standards and guidelines are "meet Aquatic Conservation 
Basis for Standards and.. B-10

Strategy objectives," "does not retard or prevent attainment of Aquatic Conservation Strategy

objectives," and "attain Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives." These phrases, coupled

with the phrase "maintain and restore" within each of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy

objectives, define the context for agency review and implementation of management

activities. Complying with the Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives means that an

agency must manage the riparian-dependent resources to maintain the existing condition or

implement actions to restore conditions. The baseline from which to assess maintaining or

restoring the condition is developed through a watershed analysis. Improvement relates to

restoring biological and physical processes within their ranges of natural variability.

The standards and guidelines are designed to focus the review of proposed and certain

existing projects to determine compatibility with the Aquatic Conservation Strategy

objectives. The standards and guidelines focus on "meeting" and "not preventing attainment"

of Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. The intent is to ensure that a decision maker

must find that the proposed management activity is consistent with the Aquatic Conservation

Strategy objectives. The decision maker will use the results of watershed analysis to support

the finding. In order to make the finding that a project or management action "meets" or "does

not prevent attainment" of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives, the analysis must

include a description of the existing condition, a description of the range of natural variability

of the important physical and biological components of a given watershed, and how the

proposed project or management action maintains the existing condition or moves it within

the range of natural variability. Management actions that do not maintain the existing

condition or lead to improved conditions in the long term would not "meet" the intent of the

Aquatic Conservation Strategy and thus, should not be implemented.
Basis for Standards and.. B-11

Aquatic Conservation Strategy Objectives

Forest Service and BLM-administered lands within the range of the northern spotted owl will

be managed to:

1. Maintain and restore the distribution, diversity, and complexity of watershed and

landscape-scale features to ensure protection of the aquatic systems to which species,

populations and communities are uniquely adapted. 

2. Maintain and restore spatial and temporal connectivity within and between watersheds.

Lateral, longitudinal, and drainage network connections include floodplains, wetlands,

upslope areas, headwater tributaries, and intact refugia. These network connections must

provide chemically and physically unobstructed routes to areas critical for fulfilling life

history requirements of aquatic and riparian-dependent species. 

3. Maintain and restore the physical integrity of the aquatic system, including shorelines,

banks, and bottom configurations.

4. Maintain and restore water quality necessary to support healthy riparian, aquatic, and

wetland ecosystems. Water quality must remain within the range that maintains the

biological, physical, and chemical integrity of the system and benefits survival, growth,

reproduction, and migration of individuals composing aquatic and riparian communities.

5. Maintain and restore the sediment regime under which aquatic ecosystems evolved.

Elements of the sediment regime include the timing, volume, rate, and character of

sediment input, storage, and transport. 

6. Maintain and restore in-stream flows sufficient to create and sustain riparian, aquatic,

and wetland habitats and to retain patterns of sediment, nutrient, and wood routing. The

timing, magnitude, duration, and spatial distribution of peak, high, and low flows must be

protected. 

7. Maintain and restore the timing, variability, and duration of floodplain inundation and

water table elevation in meadows and wetlands. 

8. Maintain and restore the species composition and structural diversity of plant

communities in riparian areas and wetlands to provide adequate summer and winter

thermal regulation, nutrient filtering, appropriate rates of surface erosion, bank erosion,

and channel migration and to supply amounts and distributions of coarse woody debris

sufficient to sustain physical complexity and stability.

9. Maintain and restore habitat to support well-distributed populations of native plant,

invertebrate, and vertebrate riparian-dependent species.
Basis for Standards and.. B-12

Components of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy

1. Riparian Reserves: Lands along streams and unstable and potentially unstable areas

where special standards and guidelines direct land use.

2. Key Watersheds: A system of large refugia comprising watersheds that are crucial to

at-risk fish species and stocks and provide high quality water.

3. Watershed Analysis: Procedures for conducting analysis that evaluates geomorphic and

ecologic processes operating in specific watersheds. This analysis should enable

watershed planning that achieves Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. Watershed

Analysis provides the basis for monitoring and restoration programs and the foundation

from which Riparian Reserves can be delineated.

4. Watershed Restoration: A comprehensive, long-term program of watershed restoration

to restore watershed health and aquatic ecosystems, including the habitats supporting fish

and other aquatic and riparian-dependent organisms.

These components are designed to operate together to maintain and restore the productivity

and resiliency of riparian and aquatic ecosystems. Late-Successional Reserves are also an

important component of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy. The standards and guidelines

under which Late-Successional Reserves are managed provide increased protection for all

stream types. Because these reserves possess late-successional characteristics, they offer core

areas of high quality stream habitat that will act as refugia and centers from which degraded

areas can be recolonized as they recover. Streams in these reserves may be particularly

important for endemic or locally distributed fish species and stocks. 

1. Riparian Reserves

There are an estimated 2,627,500 acres of Riparian Reserves interspersed within the matrix.

(Acres for matrix listed elsewhere in these standards and guidelines do not include Riparian

Reserves.) Riparian Reserves and their appurtenant standards and guidelines also apply

where these reserves overlap with any other land allocations. Acres of Riparian Reserves

within other land allocations is not calculated, but is estimated to encompass 40 percent

(based on a sample) of those allocations. The percent of area in Riparian Reserves varies

markedly among administrative units, from a high of approximately 74 percent on the

Siuslaw National Forest, to a low of approximately 4 percent on the Deschutes National

Forest.

Riparian Reserves are portions of watersheds where riparian-dependent resources receive

primary emphasis and where special standards and guidelines apply. Standards and guidelines

prohibit and regulate activities in Riparian Reserves that retard or prevent attainment of the

Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. Riparian Reserves include those portions of a

watershed directly coupled to streams and rivers, that is, the portions of a watershed required

for maintaining hydrologic, geomorphic, and ecologic processes that directly affect standing

and flowing waterbodies such as lakes and ponds, wetlands, streams, 
Basis for Standards and.. B-13

stream processes, and fish habitats. Riparian Reserves include areas designated in current

plans and draft plan preferred alternatives as riparian management areas or streamside

management zones and primary source areas for wood and sediment such as unstable and

potentially unstable areas in headwater areas and along streams. Riparian Reserves occur at

the margins of standing and flowing water, intermittent stream channels and ephemeral

ponds, and wetlands. Riparian Reserves generally parallel the stream network but also

include other areas necessary for maintaining hydrologic, geomorphic, and ecologic

processes.

Under the Aquatic Conservation Strategy, Riparian Reserves are used to maintain and restore

riparian structures and functions of intermittent streams, confer benefits to

riparian-dependent and associated species other than fish, enhance habitat conservation for

organisms that are dependent on the transition zone between upslope and riparian areas,

improve travel and dispersal corridors for many terrestrial animals and plants, and provide

for greater connectivity of the watershed. The Riparian Reserves will also serve as

connectivity corridors among the Late-Successional Reserves. 

Interim widths for Riparian Reserves necessary to meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy

objectives for different waterbodies are established based on ecologic and geomorphic

factors. These widths are designed to provide a high level of fish habitat and riparian

protection until watershed and site analysis can be completed. Watershed analysis will

identify critical hillslope, riparian, and channel processes that must be evaluated in order to

delineate Riparian Reserves that assure protection of riparian and aquatic functions. Riparian

Reserves are delineated during implementation of site-specific projects based on analysis of

the critical hillslope, riparian, and channel processes and features. Although Riparian Reserve

boundaries may be adjusted on permanently-flowing streams, the prescribed widths are

considered to approximate those necessary for attaining Aquatic Conservation Strategy

objectives. Post-watershed analysis Riparian Reserve boundaries for permanently-flowing

streams should approximate the boundaries prescribed in these standards and guidelines.

However, post-watershed analysis Riparian Reserve boundaries for intermittent streams may

be different from the existing boundaries. The reason for the difference is the high variability

of hydrologic, geomorphic and ecologic processes in a watershed affecting intermittent

streams. At the same time, any analysis of Riparian Reserve widths must also consider the

contribution of these reserves to other, including terrestrial, species. Watershed analysis

should take into account all species that were intended to be benefited by the prescribed

Riparian Reserve widths. Those species include fish, mollusks, amphibians, lichens, fungi,

bryophytes, vascular plants, American marten, red tree voles, bats, marbled murrelets, and

northern spotted owls. The specific issue for spotted owls is retention of adequate habitat

conditions for dispersal.

The prescribed widths of Riparian Reserves apply to all watersheds until watershed analysis

is completed, a site-specific analysis is conducted and described, and the rationale for final

Riparian Reserve boundaries is presented through the appropriate NEPA decision-making

process.
Basis for Standards and.. B-14

Riparian Reserve Widths

Riparian Reserves are specified on page C-30 of these standards and guidelines for the

following five categories of streams or waterbodies: 

Fish-bearing streams

Permanently flowing nonfish-bearing streams

Constructed ponds and reservoirs, and wetlands greater than 1 acre

Lakes and natural ponds

Seasonally flowing or intermittent streams, wetlands less than 1 acre, and unstable and

potentially unstable areas

Standards and guidelines specific to Riparian Reserves begin on page C-31.

Intermittent Streams

Intermittent streams are defined as any nonpermanent flowing drainage feature having a

definable channel and evidence of annual scour or deposition. This includes what are

sometimes referred to as ephemeral streams if they meet these two physical criteria.

Including intermittent streams and wetlands within Riparian Reserves is important for

successful implementation of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy. Accurate identification of

these features is critical to the correct implementation of the strategy and protection of the

intermittent stream and wetland functions and processes. Identification of these features is

difficult at times due to the lack of surface water or wet soils during dry periods. The

following discussion provides guidance on steps to identify these features for inclusion within

Riparian Reserves.

Fish-bearing streams are distinguished from intermittent streams by the presence of any

species of fish for any duration. Many intermittent streams may be used as spawning and

rearing streams, refuge areas during flood events in larger rivers and streams or travel routes

for fish emigrating from lakes. In these instances, the standards and guidelines for fishbearing streams would apply to those sections of the intermittent stream used by the fish.

The following discussion pertains to Riparian Reserve widths on intermittent streams and

wetlands necessary to meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. Other Riparian

Reserve objectives, such as providing wildlife dispersal corridors, could lead to Riparian

Reserve widths different than those necessary to protect the ecological integrity of the

intermittent stream or wetland. These other objectives could yield wider Riparian Reserves

than those necessary to meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. There can never be

instances where Riparian Reserves would be narrower than the widths necessary to meet

Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.
Basis for Standards and.. B-15

The width of Riparian Reserves necessary to protect the ecological integrity of intermittent

streams varies with slope and rock type. Figure B-1 shows the estimated size of Riparian

Reserves necessary to protect the ecological values of intermittent streams with different

slope and rock types. These estimates were made by geomorphologists, hydrologists, and fish

biologists from the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and the Environmental

Protection Agency. These distances are consistent with the height of one site-potential tree

used to define Riparian Reserve widths (see page C-30 of these standards and guidelines).

Watershed analysis provides the ecological and geomorphic basis for changing the size and

location of Riparian Reserves. 
Basis for Standards and.. B-16

The prescribed widths for Riparian Reserves apply to all streams, lakes, ponds and wetlands

on lands administered by the Forest Service and BLM within the range of the northern

spotted owl until a watershed analysis is completed. Watershed analysis is expected to yield

the contextual information needed to define ecologically and geomorphically appropriate

Riparian Reserves. Analysis of site-specific characteristics may warrant Riparian Reserves

that are narrower or wider than the prescribed widths. Thus, it is possible to meet the

objectives of at least the Aquatic Conservation Strategy portion of these standards and

guidelines with post-watershed analysis reserve boundaries for intermittent streams that are

quite different from those conforming to the prescribed widths. Regardless of stream type,

changes to Riparian Reserves must be based on scientifically sound reasoning, and be fully

justified and documented.

Wetlands

The combinations of hydrology, soils, and vegetative characteristics are the primary factors

influencing the development of wetland habitats. There must be the presence of surface water

or saturated soils to significantly reduce the oxygen content in the soils to zero or near zero

concentrations. These low or zero soil oxygen conditions must persist for sufficient duration

to promote development of plant communities that have a dominance of species adapted to

survive and grow under zero oxygen conditions. These wetland characteristics apply when

defining wetlands for regulatory jurisdiction or for technical analysis when conducting

inventories or functional assessments. Seeps and springs can be classified as streams if they

have sufficient flow in a channel or as seasonal or perennial wetlands under the criteria

defined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Manual. The standards and guidelines for

wetlands, which are based on the hydrologic, physical and biologic characteristics described

in the manual, apply to seeps and springs regardless of their size.

Formal definition for implementing section 404 of the Clean Water Act, adopted by the

Environmental Protection Agency, is as follows:

The term wetlands means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or

ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal

circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in

saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and

similar areas.

Detailed technical methods have been developed to assist in identification of wetlands that

meet the above definition. Currently, the field manual being used for implementing the Clean

Water Act is the "1987 Corps Manual." 

For purposes of conducting the National Wetland Inventory, the Fish and Wildlife Service

has broadly defined both vegetated and nonvegetated wetlands as follows:

Wetlands are lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water

table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water. For

purposes of this classification wetlands must have one or more of the following three 
Basis for Standards and.. B-17

attributes: (1) at least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydrophytes, (2) the

substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil, and (3) the substrate is nonsoil and is

saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season of

each year.

Wetlands typically occur within and adjacent to riparian zones. It is frequently difficult to

differentiate wetlands from riparian areas based on the definitions. Most typically, and

particularly in forested landscapes, the riparian zone is defined by its spatial relation to

adjacent streams or rivers. However, riparian zones are also commonly considered to be lands

integrally related to other aquatic habitats such as lakes, reservoirs, intermittent streams,

springs, seeps, and wetlands. 

Because of such conceptual and definitional vagaries, there is spatial overlap between

wetlands and riparian zones. This then results in only a portion of the riparian zone

associated with rivers and streams being considered as wetlands. The extent of that portion

will depend on the specifics of hydrologic, vegetation, and soil features. The functions of the

wetland portion may also be distinct from the nonwetlands. For example, wetlands may

provide habitat for specialized plant species or reproductive habitat for amphibians or other

organisms that would not be provided by riparian areas.

Once the Riparian Reserve width is established, either based on existing widths or watershed

analysis, then land management activities allowed in the Riparian Reserve will be directed by

standards and guidelines for managing Riparian Reserves (see page C-31). The standards and

guidelines for Riparian Reserves prohibit or regulate activities in Riparian Reserves that

retard or prevent attainment of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

Summary of Aquatic Conservation Strategy for Riparian Reserves:

Involves portions of the landscape where riparian-dependent and stream resources

receive primary emphasis.

Riparian Reserves are designated for all permanently-flowing streams, lakes,

wetlands, and intermittent streams.

Riparian Reserves include the body of water, inner gorges, all riparian vegetation,

100-year floodplain, landslides and landslide prone areas.

Reserve widths are based on some multiple of a site-potential tree or a prescribed

slope distance, whichever is greater. Reserve widths may be adjusted based on

watershed analysis to meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

Standards and guidelines prohibit programmed timber harvest, and manage roads,

grazing, mining and recreation to achieve objectives of the Aquatic Conservation

Strategy (see page C-31).
Basis for Standards and.. B-18

2. Key Watersheds 

There are 8,119,400 acres of Tier 1 Key Watersheds, and 1,001,700 acres of Tier 2 Key

Watersheds within the range of the northern spotted owl. Key Watersheds overlay the land

allocations of designated areas and matrix as follows:

Acres in each designated area and matrix, by Key and non-Key Watersheds.

 Tier 1 Tier 2 non-Key Total

Designated Areas

 Congressionally Reserved Areas 2,728,000 311,200 4,281,400 7,320,600

 Late-Successional Reserves 3,151,700 279,100 4,000,000 7,430,800

 Adaptive Management Areas 228,100 60,600 1,233,100 1,521,800

 Managed Late-Successional Areas 55,100 0 47,100 102,200

 Administratively Withdrawn Areas 407,900 54,700 1,014,500 1,477,100

 Riparian Reserves (based on sample) 631,000 113,700 1,882,800 2,627,500

Matrix

 Matrix 917,600 182,400 2,875,300 3,975,300

 Total 8,119,400 1,001,700 15,334,200 24,455,300

Refugia are a cornerstone of most species conservation strategies. They are designated areas

that either provide, or are expected to provide, high quality habitat. A system of Key

Watersheds that serve as refugia is crucial for maintaining and recovering habitat for at-risk

stocks of anadromous salmonids and resident fish species. These refugia include areas of high

quality habitat as well as areas of degraded habitat. Key Watersheds with high quality

conditions will serve as anchors for the potential recovery of depressed stocks. Those of

lower quality habitat have a high potential for restoration and will become future sources of

high quality habitat with the implementation of a comprehensive restoration program (see

Watershed Restoration later in this section of these standards and guidelines).

The Aquatic Conservation Strategy includes two designations for Key Watersheds. Tier 1

(Aquatic Conservation Emphasis) Key Watersheds contribute directly to conservation of

at-risk anadromous salmonids, bull trout, and resident fish species. They also have a high

potential of being restored as part of a watershed restoration program. Tier 1 Key Watersheds

consist primarily of watersheds identified previously by the Scientific Panel on LateSuccessional Forest Ecosystems (1991), and in the Scientific Analysis Team Report (1993).

The network of 143 Tier 1 Key Watersheds ensures that refugia are widely distributed across

the landscape. While 21 Tier 2 (other) Key Watersheds may not contain at-risk fish stocks,

they are important sources of high quality water.

Long-term management within Key Watersheds requires watershed analysis prior to further

resource management activity. In the short term, until watershed analysis can be completed,

minor activities such as those that would be Categorically Excluded under National

Environmental Policy Act regulations (except timber harvest) may proceed if they are

consistent with Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives and apply Riparian Reserves and 
Basis for Standards and.. B-19

standards and guidelines. Timber harvest, including salvage, can not occur in Key

Watersheds without a watershed analysis. Key Watersheds that currently contain poor

quality habitat are believed to have the best opportunity for successful restoration and will

receive priority in any watershed restoration program. 

Roadless Areas and Key Watersheds

Management activities in inventoried roadless areas with unstable land will increase the risk

to aquatic and riparian habitat, impair the capacity of Key Watersheds to function as

intended, and limit the potential to achieve Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

Standards and guidelines that refer to inventoried roadless areas (or simply "roadless areas")

apply only to those portions of such areas that would still qualify as roadless under the

guidelines used to originally designate the areas under the second Forest Service Roadless

Area Review and Evaluation (RARE II).

To protect the remaining high quality habitats, no new roads will be constructed in

inventoried roadless areas in Key Watersheds. Watershed analysis must be conducted in all

non-Key Watersheds that contain roadless areas before any management activities can occur

within those roadless areas.

The amount of existing system and nonsystem roads within Key Watersheds should be

reduced through decommissioning of roads. Road closures with gates or barriers do not

qualify as decommissioning or a reduction in road mileage. If funding is insufficient to

implement reductions, there will be no net increase in the amount of roads in Key

Watersheds. That is, for each mile of new road constructed, at least one mile of road should

be decommissioned, and priority given to roads that pose the greatest risks to riparian and

aquatic ecosystems.

Summary of Aquatic Conservation Strategy for Key Watersheds:

Tier 1 Key Watersheds were selected for directly contributing to anadromous

salmonid and bull trout conservation.

Tier 2 Key Watersheds were selected as sources of high quality water and may not

contain at-risk fish stocks

No new roads will be built in roadless areas in Key Watersheds.

Reduce existing system and nonsystem road mileage outside roadless areas. If

funding is insufficient to implement reductions, there will be no net increase in the

amount of roads in Key Watersheds.

Key Watersheds are highest priority for watershed restoration.

Watershed analysis is required prior to management activities, except minor

activities such as those Categorically Excluded under NEPA (and not including

timber harvest).
Basis for Standards and.. B-20

Timber harvest cannot occur in Key Watersheds prior to completing a watershed

analysis.

Standards and guidelines specific to Key Watersheds are summarized on page C-7 of these

standards and guidelines.

3. Watershed Analysis

Watershed analysis, as described here, focuses on implementing the Aquatic Conservation

Strategy. The broader role of watershed analysis in relation to implementing the ecosystem

management objectives proposed by these standards and guidelines is described in Section E,

Implementation. Watershed analysis is one of the principal analyses that will be used in

making decisions on implementation of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy.

Watershed analysis is required in Key Watersheds, for roadless areas in non-Key Watersheds,

and Riparian Reserves prior to determining how proposed land management activities meet

Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. Watershed analyses must be completed before

initiating actions within a Key Watershed, except that in the short term, until watershed

analysis can be completed, minor activities such as those that would be categorically excluded

under National Environmental Policy Act regulations (except timber harvest) may proceed if

they are consistent with Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives and Riparian Reserves and

standards and guidelines are applied. Timber harvest, including salvage, cannot occur in Key

Watersheds without a watershed analysis. Ultimately, watershed analyses should be

conducted in all watersheds on federal lands as a basis for ecosystem planning and

management.

Watershed analysis has a critical role in providing for aquatic and riparian habitat protection.

In planning for ecosystem management and establishing Riparian Reserves to protect and

restore riparian and aquatic habitat, the overall watershed condition and the array of

processes operating there need to be considered. Watershed condition includes more than just

the state of the channel and riparian area. It also includes the condition of the uplands,

distribution and type of seral classes of vegetation, land use history, effects of previous

natural and land-use related disturbances, and distribution and abundance of species and

populations throughout the watershed. These factors strongly influence the structure and

functioning of aquatic and riparian habitat. Effective protection strategies for riparian and

aquatic habitat on federal lands must accommodate the wide variability in landscape

conditions present across the Pacific Northwest. Watershed analysis plays a key role in the

Aquatic Conservation Strategy, ensuring that aquatic system protection is fitted to specific

landscapes.

Watershed analysis will focus on collecting and compiling information within the watershed

that is essential for making sound management decisions. It will be an analytical process, not

a decision-making process with a proposed action requiring NEPA documentation. It will 
Basis for Standards and.. B-21

serve as the basis for developing project-specific proposals, and monitoring and restoration

needs for a watershed. Some analysis of issues or resources may be included in broader scale

analyses because of their scope. The information from the watershed analyses will contribute

to decision making at all levels. Project-specific NEPA planning will use information

developed from watershed analysis. For example, if watershed analysis shows that restoring

certain resources within a watershed could contribute to achieving landscape or ecosystem

management objectives, then subsequent decisions will need to address that information.

The results of watershed analyses may include a description of the resource needs,

capabilities, opportunities, the range of natural variability, spatially explicit information that

will facilitate environmental and cumulative effects analyses for NEPA, and the processes

and functions operating within the watershed. Watershed analysis will identify potentially

disjunct approaches and conflicting objectives within watersheds. The information from

watershed analysis will be used to develop priorities for funding, and implementing actions

and projects, and will be used in developing monitoring strategies and objectives. The

participation of adjacent landowners, private citizens, interest groups, industry, various

government agencies, and others in watershed analyses will be promoted.

Watershed analysis is a systematic procedure for characterizing watershed and ecological

processes to meet specific management and social objectives. This information will support

decisions for implementing management prescriptions, including setting and refining

boundaries of Riparian Reserves and other reserves, developing restoration strategies and

priorities, and revealing the most useful indicators for monitoring environmental changes.

Watershed analysis is an important analytical step supporting ecosystem planning for

watersheds of approximately 20 to 200 square miles (Figure B-2). It is a key component

supporting watershed planning and analyzing the blending of social expectations with the

biophysical capabilities of specific landscapes. Watershed analysis is the appropriate level for

analyzing the effects of transportation systems on aquatic and riparian habitats within the

target watershed. In contrast, issues pertaining to stocks at risk would generally be more

applicable at the province or river basin analytical levels, as discussed in Section E of these

standards and guidelines, rather than the 20 to 200 square mile watershed level.

Watershed analysis consists of technically rigorous and defensible procedures designed to

identify processes that are active within a watershed, how those processes are distributed in

time and space, the current upland and riparian conditions of the watershed, and how all of

these factors influence riparian habitat and other beneficial uses. The analysis is conducted by

an interdisciplinary team consisting of geomorphologists, hydrologists, soil scientists,

biologists and other specialists as needed. Information used in this analysis includes: maps of

topography, stream networks, soils, vegetation, and geology; sequential aerial photographs;

field inventories and surveys including landslide, channel, aquatic habitat, and riparian

condition inventories; census data on species presence and abundance; water quality data;

disturbance and land use history; and other historical data (e.g., streamflow records, old

channel surveys).
Basis for Standards and.. B-22
Basis for Standards and.. B-23

Watershed analysis is organized as a set of modules that examine biotic and abiotic processes

influencing aquatic habitat and species abundance (e.g., landslides, surface erosion, peak and

low streamflows, stream temperatures, road network effects, coarse woody debris dynamics,

channel processes, fire, limiting factor analysis for key species). Results from these modules

are integrated into a description of current upland, riparian, and channel conditions; maps of

location, frequency, and magnitude of key processes; and descriptions of location and

abundance of key species.

Watershed analysis provides the contextual basis at the site level for decision makers to set

appropriate boundaries of Riparian Reserves, plan land use activities compatible with

disturbance patterns, design road transportation networks that pose minimal risk, identify

what and where restoration activities will be most effective, and establish specific parameters

and activities to be monitored. More detailed site-level analysis is conducted to provide the

information and designs needed for specific projects (e.g., road siting or timber sale layout)

so that riparian and aquatic habitats are protected.

Watershed analysis provides the ecologic and geomorphic basis for changing the size and

location of Riparian Reserves necessary to meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

Ultimate design of Riparian Reserves is likely to be a hybrid of decisions based on

consideration of sites of special ecological value, slope stability, wildlife dispersal corridors,

endemic species considerations and natural disturbance processes.

Figure B-3 illustrates how slope stability and debris flow runout models may be used as part

of watershed analysis for adjusting Riparian Reserves. The result is that the basin is stratified

into areas that may require wider or narrower Riparian Reserves than those conforming to

Riparian Reserve Scenario 1 for intermittent streams. For example, on intermittent streams in

unstable areas with high potential to generate slides and debris flows, Riparian Reserves

wider than those conforming to the definition may be necessary to ensure ecological integrity.

Riparian Reserves in more stable areas may be less extensive, managed under upland

standards and guidelines (e.g., levels of green-tree retention as either single trees or in patches

of a specific size), or a combination of these. 

Slope stability analysis for Augusta Creek is an example in which likely impact mechanisms

are identified (Figure B-4). Distribution of areas subject to slope instability was interpreted

from information contained within the Willamette National Forest Soil Resource Inventory.

Slope data for each mapped unit was extracted from the Willamette National Forest Soil

Resource Inventory based on whether hillslope gradients were less than 30 percent, between

30 and 60 percent, and greater than 60 percent. Geologic descriptions from the Willamette

National Forest Soil Resource Inventory were used to determine whether underlying bedrock

was hard, moderately hard, or soft. A hazard rating of low, moderate, or high slide potential

was assigned to each mapped unit based on hillslope gradient and geologic description

(Figure B-4). Predicted hazard ratings were tested and found to be in excellent agreement

with the historical pattern of landslides observed on aerial photographs. This analytical step

ensures that field and analysis time will be used efficiently to address the most important

processes and issues in the watershed. 

Using the results from the slope stability analysis, watersheds were stratified into subareas in 
Basis for Standards and.. B-24

order to evaluate the watersheds as uniform response units for each of the processes or issues

of concern. The process of determining debris flow susceptibility for Augusta Creek is an

example of how a watershed might be stratified and how this stratification may be used as a

basis for mapping Riparian Reserves (Figure B-3). To determine the susceptibility of

different stream reaches to debris flows, a stream network map was overlaid on the slide

potential map (Figure B-4). Areas with high slope instability were assumed to be most likely

to generate debris flows. First-order channels (headward channels without tributaries) were

assigned a debris flow hazard rating equal to the slide potential of the surrounding landscape

(Figure B-4). Debris flow hazard to higher order channels downstream was assumed to be a

function of two factors: channel gradient (Figure B-5) and tributary junction angle (Figure B6). Debris flow hazard was reduced on the class where channel gradient was less than 3

degrees or tributary junction angle exceeded 70 degrees, to produce a map of debris flow

potential (Figure B-7). The stratification will vary according to process or issue. Within a

given physiographic province, similar geographic and topographic features control drainage

network and hillslope stability patterns. These features may exert a strong influence on the

design of Riparian Reserves. For example, in the highly dissected southern Oregon Coast

Range, debris flows originating in channel heads are the primary mass movement process.

Large, slow-moving earthflows are dominant in the western Oregon Cascades. Earthflows

qualify as unstable and potentially unstable areas and would be analyzed for inclusion within

Riparian Reserves for intermittent streams. To adequately protect the aquatic system from

management induced landsliding, Riparian Reserve design may vary as a result of these

differences. In the Coast Range, Riparian Reserves would tend to be in narrow bands

associated with intermittent streams, relatively evenly distributed throughout the basin, while

those in the Cascades may be locally extensive and centered around earthflows. Stable areas

in other parts of the watershed may have reduced Riparian Reserves on intermittent streams.

Earthflows can cover extensive amounts of land within a watershed. As such, they largely

influence the resulting landscape and directly affect aquatic and riparian habitat quality,

structure and function. For example, streams flowing through active earthflows would tend to

cut the toes of the inner gorges. Thus, the earthflow would serve as a chronic source of

sediment to the channel. The effects of constructing roads or harvesting timber on the rate of

sediment delivery to the channel on the earthflow would need to be considered during the

design of the Riparian Reserve. Thus, the amount of a particular earthflow incorporated into a

Riparian Reserve, as identified through watershed analysis, depends on the risk of

management-induced disturbances and meeting Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

The risk will be determined based on an analysis of the projected instability of the earthflow

relative to the recovery rate of aquatic and riparian ecosystems. There will be cases where

entire earthflows will be incorporated into Riparian Reserves and cases where only those

portions determined to directly affect the rate of achieving Aquatic Conservation Strategy

objectives will be incorporated. 

The efficacy of many previous analyses at the watershed level suffered from unclear logic

used in weighting or combining individual elements, reliance on simple indices to explain

complex phenomena, and assumptions of direct or linear relations between land use intensity

and watershed response. These previous watershed analyses typically did not consider how

key processes are distributed over watersheds within a given landscape and, in many cases,

did not distinguish between physiographic provinces, which can vary widely in the

importance of individual processes. Furthermore, most of the previous approaches lacked any

method to validate their assumptions or results.





Basis for Standards and.. B-30

While watershed analysis can provide essential information for designing land use activities

over the entire watershed, it can also highlight uncertainties in knowledge or understanding

that need to be addressed. Watershed analysis is emerging as a new standard for assessing

watershed condition and land use impacts. The process described in these standards and

guidelines builds on more recent, comprehensive approaches, including the Water Resources

Evaluation of Nonpoint Silvicultural Sources program; the watershed analysis procedure

developed by the Washington State Timber, Fish and Wildlife program; and the cumulative

effects methods being developed by the National Council on Air and Stream Improvement.

Analysis modules in Watershed Analysis are patterned after the first two approaches because

a modular approach allows flexibility in selecting methods appropriate to a particular

watershed and facilitates modification of specific techniques as improved methods become

available. Unique aspects of the watershed analysis procedure described in the FEMAT

Report include explicit consideration of biological as well as physical processes, and the joint

consideration of upland and riparian areas.

Watershed analysis is one of the important aspects of effectively implementing ecosystem

planning and management on a watershed basis. Information gained through watershed

analysis will be vital to adaptive management over broad physiographic provinces. When

current plans and draft plan preferred alternatives are revised, information gathered through

watershed analysis will, in part, be the basis of these revisions.

Summary of Aquatic Conservation Strategy for Watershed

Analysis:

Watershed analysis is a systematic procedure to characterize watersheds. The

information is used to guide management prescription and monitoring programs, set

and refine Riparian Reserve boundaries, and develop restoration.

It is required in Key Watersheds prior to resource management.

It is required in all roadless areas prior to resource management.

It is recommended in all other watersheds.

It is required to change Riparian Reserve widths in all watersheds.

Earthflows qualify as unstable and potentially unstable areas and would be analyzed

for inclusion within Riparian Reserves.

Watershed analysis is important in developing monitoring strategies.

4. Watershed Restoration

Watershed restoration will be an integral part of a program to aid recovery of fish habitat,

riparian habitat, and water quality. Restoration will be based on watershed analysis and

planning. Watershed analysis is essential to identify areas of greatest benefit-to-cost

relationships for restoration opportunities and greatest likelihood of success. Watershed

analysis can also be used as a medium to develop cooperative projects involving various 
Basis for Standards and.. B-31

landowners. In many watersheds the most critical restoration needs occur on private lands

downstream from federally managed lands. Decisions to apply a given treatment depend on

the value and sensitivity of downstream uses, transportation needs, social expectations, risk

assessment of probable outcomes for success at correcting problems, costs, and other factors.

Watershed analysis, including the use of sediment budgets, provides a framework for

considering benefit-to-cost relations in a watershed context. Thus, the magnitude of

restoration needs within the planning area will be based on watershed analysis.

The most important components of a watershed restoration program are control and

prevention of road-related runoff and sediment production, restoration of the condition of

riparian vegetation, and restoration of in-stream habitat complexity. Other restoration

opportunities exist, such as meadow and wetland restoration and mine reclamation, and these

may be quite important in some areas. Regionally however, these opportunities are much less

extensive than the three components listed above. 

Roads

Road treatments range from full decommissioning (closing and stabilizing a road to eliminate

potential for storm damage and the need for maintenance) to simple road upgrading, which

leaves the road open. Upgrading can involve practices such as removing soil from locations

where there is a high potential of triggering landslides, modifying road drainage systems to

reduce the extent to which the road functions as an extension of the stream network, and

reconstructing stream crossings to reduce the risk and consequences of road failure or

washing out at the crossings.

The decision to apply a given treatment depends on the value and sensitivity of downstream

uses, transportation needs, social expectations, assessment of probable outcomes for success

at correcting problems, costs, and other factors. Watershed analysis, including the use of

sediment budgets, provides a framework for considering benefit-to-cost relations in a

watershed context. Thus, the magnitude of regional restoration needs will be based on

watershed analysis. 

Riparian Vegetation

Active silvicultural programs will be necessary to restore large conifers in Riparian Reserves.

Appropriate practices may include planting unstable areas such as landslides along streams

and flood terraces, thinning densely-stocked young stands to encourage development of large

conifers, releasing young conifers from overtopping hardwoods, and reforesting shrub and

hardwood-dominated stands with conifers. These practices can be implemented along with

silvicultural treatments in uplands areas, although the practices will differ in objective and,

consequently, design.

In-Stream Habitat Structures

In-stream restoration, based on the interpretation of physical and biological processes and

deficiencies during watershed analysis, can be an important component of an overall program

for restoring fish and riparian habitat. In-stream restoration measures are inherently short

term and must be accompanied by riparian and upslope restoration to achieve 
Basis for Standards and.. B-32

long-term watershed restoration. Maintaining desired levels of channel habitat complexity,

for example, may best be achieved in the short term by introducing structures. However, a

riparian area with the complete array of functions and processes should provide coarse woody

debris to the channel in the long term.

In-stream restoration will be accompanied by riparian and upslope restoration if watershed

restoration is to be successful. In-stream restoration, including in-channel structures, will not

be used to mitigate for management actions that degrade existing habitat, as a substitute for

habitat protection, or to justify risky land management activities and practices. Priority must

be given to protecting existing high quality habitat.

Summary of Aquatic Conservation Strategy for Watershed

Restoration:

Watershed restoration restores watershed processes to recover degraded habitat.

Watershed restoration should focus on removing and upgrading roads.

Silvicultural treatments may be used to restore large conifers in Riparian Reserves.

Watershed restoration should restore channel complexity. In-stream structures should

only be used in the short term and not as a mitigation for poor land management

practices.

Monitoring

The following monitoring section is specific to achieving the stated objectives of the Aquatic

Conservation Strategy. Implementation, effectiveness, and validation monitoring need to be

conducted consistent with the monitoring discussion in Section E of these standards and

guidelines.

Watershed analysis will support decisions for a variety of planned ecosystem management

actions within watersheds. Specific actions may include habitat restoration, sediment

reduction programs, road removal and management, timber harvesting, development of a

recreation facility, or any of a multitude of activities. Monitoring will be an essential

component of these management actions and will be guided by the results of watershed

analysis.

General objectives of monitoring will be to: (1) determine if Best Management Practices have

been implemented, (2) determine the effectiveness of management practices at multiple

scales, ranging from individual sites to watersheds, and (3) validate whether ecosystem

functions and processes have been maintained as predicted. In addition, monitoring will

provide feedback to fuel the adaptive management process. 

Specific monitoring objectives will be derived from results of the watershed analysis and

tailored to each watershed. Monitoring at the 20 to 200 square mile watershed level will link

monitoring for ecosystem management objectives for multiple scales of province, river basin,

smaller watershed and site-specific levels. Specific locations of unstable and potentially

unstable areas, roads, and harvest activities will be identified. In addition, the spatial

relationship of potentially unstable areas and management actions to sensitive habitats such 
Basis for Standards and.. B-33

as wetlands will be determined. This information provides a basis for targeting watershed

monitoring activities to assess outcomes associated with risks and uncertainties identified

during watershed analyses. 

Under natural conditions, river and stream habitats on federal forest lands exhibit an

extremely wide diversity of conditions depending on past disturbances, topography,

geomorphology, climate and other factors. Consequently, riparian area monitoring must be

dispersed among the various landscapes rather than concentrated at a few sites and then

extrapolated to the entire forest. Logistical and financial constraints require a stratified

monitoring program that includes:

Post-project site review

Reference to subdrainages

Basin monitoring

A water quality network

Landscape integration of monitoring data

A stratified monitoring program examines watersheds at several spatial and temporal scales.

Information is provided on hillslope, floodplain, and channel functions, water quality, fish

and wildlife habitat and populations, and vegetation diversity and dynamics.

Parameters selected for monitoring depend on the activities planned for a given watershed

designed to specifically address forest practices and associated activities such as road

construction and maintenance. Two of the more extensive activities related to water quality

are timber harvest and road related operations. Other activities such as mining and in-stream

channel alterations to improve habitat can affect water quality in localized areas. In addition

to chemical and physical parameters, biological criteria may be appropriate to monitor using

techniques such as Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for macroinvertebrates or the index of

biotic integrity for fish diversity. 

Long-term systematic monitoring in selected watersheds will be necessary to provide

reference points for effectiveness and validation monitoring. These watersheds should

represent a range of forest and stream conditions that have been exposed to natural and

induced disturbance. Reference watersheds, subbasins, and individual sites will be selected as

part of the overall adaptive management process described as part of these standards and

guidelines. 

Study plans will be cooperatively developed based on province, river basin, and/or watershed

level analyses. Long-term data sets from reference watersheds will provide an essential basis

for adaptive management and a gauge by which to assess trends in in-stream condition.

Monitoring plans must be tailored for each watershed. Significant differences in type and

intensity of monitoring will occur based on watershed characteristics and management

actions. For example, carefully targeted restoration activities may only require effectiveness

monitoring of single activities, whereas watershed-scale restoration would be accompanied 
Basis for Standards and.. B-34

by extensive riparian and in-stream monitoring. The specific design of monitoring programs

can best be accomplished by the local interdisciplinary teams working in cooperation with

state programs. Pooling the monitoring resources of federal and state agencies is a necessity

to provide interagency consistency and to increase available resources.

Monitoring will be conducted and results will be documented, analyzed and reported by the

agency or agencies responsible for land management in any particular watershed. Reports will

be reviewed by local interdisciplinary teams. In addition, water resource regulatory agencies

may review results to determine compliance with appropriate standards, and province and

river basin-level strategies. A cross-section of team members that includes participants from

states and regulatory agencies should assess monitoring results and recommend changes in

Best Management Practices or the mechanisms for Best Management Practice

implementation.
Standards and Guidelines C-1

C. Standards and Guidelines

Although the direction in all sections of this document constitutes standards and guidelines,

standards and guidelines specific to particular land allocation categories, or relative to

specific types of management activities, are included (or referenced) in this section, Section

C, of these standards and guidelines.

All land allocations have specific management direction regarding how those lands are to be

managed, including actions that are prohibited and descriptions of the conditions that should

occur there. This management direction for specific lands is known as “standards and

guidelines”— the rules and limits governing actions, and the principles specifying the

environmental conditions or levels to be achieved and maintained. 

Existing Laws and Regulations

Additional direction to management agencies includes, but is not limited to directives, policy,

handbooks, manuals, as well as other plans, regulations, laws and treaties. The standards and

guidelines presented in this document supersede other direction except treaties, laws, and

regulations unless that direction is more restrictive or provides greater benefits to latesuccessional forest related species. None of these standards and guidelines applies where they

would be contrary to existing law or regulation, or where they would require the agencies to

take actions for which they do not have authority.

Hierarchy of Standards and Guidelines

In some areas, land allocations overlap. Standards and guidelines for Congressionally

Reserved Areas must be met first. Second, Riparian Reserve standards and guidelines apply

and are added to the standards and guidelines of other designated areas. For example, where

Riparian Reserves occur within Late-Successional Reserves, the standards and guidelines of

both designations apply. Key Watershed designations may overlay any of the allocations

(Congressionally Reserved Areas, Late-Successional Reserves, Managed Late-Successional

Areas, Adaptive Management Areas, Administratively Withdrawn Areas, or the matrix). In

this case, the standards and guidelines for the allocations apply, and the Key Watershed

designation adds additional requirements. In all allocations, standards and guidelines in

current plans and draft plan preferred alternatives apply where they are more restrictive or

provide greater benefits to late-successional forest related species (see page C-3 for four

specific exceptions). For example, thinning in a Late-Successional Reserve would be

permitted only if it is consistent with the standards and guidelines in this document, and also

is consistent with the standards and guidelines of the underlying current plan or draft plan

preferred alternative.
Standards and Guidelines C-2

Standards and Guidelines Common to all Land

Allocations

Current Plans and Draft Plan Preferred Alternatives

Although these standards and guidelines supplement existing plans, these standards and

guidelines also incorporate certain standards and guidelines from Draft National Forest Plans

and Draft BLM Resource Management Plans. When these standards and guidelines were

prepared, beginning in April 1993, BLM Districts and National Forests either had completed

(current) Forest and Resource Management Plans, or they were in the process of developing

such plans. For those units that had not completed their plans, the then-current version, or

draft, of the unit's preferred alternative was identified. These current plans and draft plan

preferred alternatives were used as the base or starting point for these standards and

guidelines. Therefore, except as specifically excepted below (see page C-3), standards and

guidelines (including Administratively Withdrawn Areas) from current plans and draft plan

preferred alternatives apply where they are more restrictive or provide greater benefits to latesuccessional forest related species than other provisions of these standards and guidelines.

The standards and guidelines from the following current plans and draft plan preferred

alternatives apply where they are more restrictive or provide greater benefits to latesuccessional forest related species than other provisions of these standards and guidelines:

Forest Service in Oregon and Washington - 1984 Regional Guide as amended in 1988.

Existing Forest Plans for the Olympic, Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie, Gifford Pinchot,

Okanogan, Wenatchee, Siuslaw, Mt. Hood, Willamette, Deschutes, Winema, Umpqua,

Rogue River, and Siskiyou National Forests, approved 1988-1991.

Bureau of Land Management, Oregon - The April 1993 Revised Preferred Alternative to

the Draft Resource Management Plans and EISs originally released August 1992 for the

Salem, Eugene, Coos Bay, Roseburg, and Medford Districts, and the Klamath Falls

Resource Area of the Lakeview District.

Forest Service, California - 1984 Regional Guide. Existing Forest Plans for the Lassen

and Modoc National Forests. The Preferred Alternative as of May 1993 for Draft Forest

Plans being developed for the Klamath, Shasta-Trinity, Mendocino, and Six Rivers

National Forests.

Bureau of Land Management, California - Existing Resource Management Plans for the

Arcata and Redding Resource Areas, approved 1992 and 1993, respectively. Existing

Management Plan for the King Range National Conservation Area, approved 1974.

Related approved plans such as those for National Scenic Areas or Wild and Scenic

Rivers are similarly assumed to apply where they are more restrictive or provide greater

benefits for late-successional forest related species.
Standards and Guidelines C-3

Exceptions

Exceptions to the above rule consists of those provisions of these standards and guidelines

that are specifically designed to replace direction in current plans and draft plan preferred

alternatives. These exceptions are:

1. Direction specific to management for the northern spotted owl and its habitat. Because of

protection provided by these standards and guidelines, the BLM (Oregon) direction

adapted from the Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl-Draft has been modified

(see other provisions of these standards and guidelines), and the Forest Service direction

adopting elements of A Conservation Strategy for the Northern Spotted Owl has been

dropped.

2. Administratively Withdrawn Areas that are specified in current plans and draft plan

preferred alternatives to benefit American martens, pileated woodpeckers, and other latesuccessional species are returned to the matrix unless local knowledge indicates that

other allocations and these standards and guidelines will not meet management objectives

for these species.

3. Green-tree retention standards for the matrix exceeding 15 percent in current plans and

draft plan preferred alternatives for National Forests are superseded by the 15 percent

retention direction in these standards and guidelines unless local knowledge indicates

such direction must be retained to meet management objectives.

4. As described for Adaptive Management Areas elsewhere in these standards and

guidelines, standards and guidelines within current plans and draft plan preferred

alternatives need to be considered during planning and implementation of activities

within Adaptive Management Areas, and they may be modified in Adaptive Management

Area plans based on site-specific analysis. Coordination with the Regional Ecosystem

Office is required.

Unmapped Late-Successional Reserves

Standards and guidelines for unmapped Late-Successional Reserves and Managed LateSuccessional Areas prohibit or limit activities that otherwise appear to be within the matrix,

Adaptive Management Area, or some other land allocation. Unmapped Late-Successional

Reserves are identified for all LS/OG 1s and 2s within Marbled Murrelet Zone 1, around

occupied marbled murrelet sites, and for 100 acres around known spotted owl activity

centers. Unmapped Late-Successional Reserves and Managed Late-Successional Areas are

identified for certain Protection Buffers. See the Late-Successional Reserve and Managed

Late-Successional Area descriptions later in this section of these standards and guidelines for

specific information. 

Watershed Analysis

Watershed analysis is required in all Key Watersheds and all roadless areas prior to resource

management. Watershed analysis is required to change Riparian Reserves widths in all

watersheds. See the Aquatic Conservation Strategy starting on page B-9 of these standards

and guidelines for additional information about watershed analysis.
Standards and Guidelines C-4

Research

A variety of wildlife and other research activities may be ongoing and proposed in all land

allocations. These activities must be assessed to determine if they are consistent with the

objectives of these standards and guidelines. Some activities (including those within

experimental forests) not otherwise consistent with the objectives may be appropriate,

particularly if the activities will test critical assumptions of these standards and guidelines,

will produce results important for habitat development, or if the activities represent

continuation of long-term research. Every effort should be made to locate non-conforming

activities in land allocations where they will have the least adverse effect upon the objectives

of these standards and guidelines.

Current, funded, agency-approved research that meets the above criteria, is assumed to

continue if analysis ensures that a significant risk to Aquatic Conservation Strategy

objectives does not exist. Research Stations and other Forest Service and BLM units will,

within 180 days of the signing of the Record of Decision, submit a brief project summary to

the Regional Ecosystem Office of ongoing research projects that are potentially inconsistent

with other standards and guidelines in this document but are expected to continue under the

above research exception. The Regional Ecosystem Office may choose to more formally

review specific projects, and may recommend to the Regional Interagency Executive

Committee modification, up to and including cancellation, of those projects that have an

unacceptable risk the objectives of these standards and guidelines.

Oregon-California Border

Where standards and guidelines vary between northern California and Oregon, management

along administrative unit boundaries instead of the state line is acceptable as long as it is

consistent, is stated as the intent of the unit, involves only a slight fraction of the unit, and

does not violate a clear assumption of these standards and guidelines.

Survey and Manage

These measures may apply within any land allocations. However, the survey and manage

provision for each species will be directed to the range of that species and the particular

habitats that it is known to occupy. The "survey and manage" standard and guideline will

provide benefits to amphibians, mammals, bryophytes, mollusks, vascular plants, fungi,

lichens, and arthropods. Table C-3 at the end of this section of these standards and guidelines

shows what species are covered by the survey and manage provision, and which of the

following four categories is to be applied to each. The standard and guideline contains four

components, and priorities differ among them.

1. Manage known sites. Management of known species sites should receive the highest

priority of these four categories. Efforts must be undertaken to acquire information on

these known sites and to manage this information so that it is available to all project

planners. An effective way to accomplish this is to compile the information in a GIS data

base. Those efforts should be coordinated by the Regional Ecosystem Office, and should

be completed expeditiously. As soon as the information becomes available, it should be

used in the design or modification of activities. Activities that are implemented in 1994

should use this information to the greatest degree possible. Activities implemented in

1995 and later must include provisions for these known sites. In most cases, the 
Standards and Guidelines C-5

appropriate action will be protection of relatively small sites, on the order of tens of

acres. For some species, including some vascular plants, the appropriate action will

include the use of specific management treatments such as prescribed fire. For rare and

endemic fungus species, areas of 160 acres should be temporarily withdrawn from

ground-disturbing activities around known sites until those sites can be thoroughly

surveyed and site-specific measures prescribed. For one fungus species, Oxyporous

nobilissimus, there are only six known sites and two of these do not currently have a

protected status. Management areas of all useable habitat up to 600 acres are to be

established around these two sites for the protection of those populations until the sites

can be thoroughly surveyed and site-specific measures prescribed. The actions to protect

Oxyporous must be undertaken immediately.

2. Survey prior to ground-disturbing activities. Measures to survey for species and

manage newly discovered sites are to be phased-in over a somewhat longer timeframe

than the measures specified for currently known sites (see above). For some species,

these efforts have been ongoing through rare and sensitive species programs. Where such

efforts have been ongoing, they should continue. However, protocols have not been

developed for surveys for all of these species, and the expertise needed to conduct them is

not readily available in some cases. Efforts to design protocols and implement surveys

should be started immediately. Where surveys are completed, the information gathered

from them should be used to establish managed sites for species. Within the known or

suspected ranges and within the habitat types or vegetation communities associated with

the species, surveys for Del Norte, Larch Mountain, Shasta, Siskiyou Mountains, and

Van Dyke's salamanders, and red tree voles (and lynx, see page C-47), must precede the

design of all ground-disturbing activities that will be implemented in 1997 or later.

Development of survey protocols for the other 71 species listed in Table C-3 must begin

in 1994 and proceed as soon as possible. These surveys must be completed prior to

ground disturbing activities that will be implemented in F.Y. 1999 or later. Work to

establish habitat requirements and survey protocols may be prioritized relative to the

estimated threats to the species as reflected in the SEIS. Management standards will be

developed to manage habitat for the species on sites where they are located. These

surveys may be conducted at a scale most appropriate to the species. For most species,

this survey would start at the watershed analysis level with identification of likely species

locations based on habitat. Those likely locations would then be thoroughly searched

prior to implementation of activities. For other species, the identification of likely sites

may be most appropriately done at the scale of individual projects. Surveys should be

designed for maximum efficiency, focusing on the likely range and habitats of the target

species. Multispecies surveys should be used wherever they would be most efficient. To

the degree possible, surveys should be designed to minimize the number of site visits

needed to acquire credible information. Survey protocols and proposed site management

should be incorporated into interagency conservation strategies developed as part of

ongoing planning efforts coordinated by the Regional Ecosystem Office.

3. Extensive surveys. Conduct extensive surveys for the species to find high-priority sites

for species management. Specific surveys prior to ground-disturbing activities are not a

requirement. Rather, the surveys will be done according to a schedule that is most

efficient, and sites will be identified for protection at that time. This strategy entails some

risk because some species sites may be disturbed prior to completion of surveys. It is

recommended primarily for species whose characteristics make site and time-specific

surveys difficult. For example, some fungi only produce fruiting bodies under specific 
Standards and Guidelines C-6

climatic conditions, so finding their location may take several to many years. It would be

most efficient to do broad surveys for these species during times of appropriate

conditions rather than attempting annual, site-specific surveys. Surveys under this

strategy must be underway by 1996. As with surveys described in item 2 above, surveys

should be designed for efficiency and standardized protocols should be developed.

4. General regional surveys. The objective is to survey for the species to acquire additional

information and to determine necessary levels of protection. Species intended to benefit

from this standard and guideline are the arthropods, the fungi species that were not

classed as rare and endemic, bryophytes, and lichens. These groups of species are

particularly poorly known. Many species have likely not yet been identified, and there is

only general information available on the abundance and distribution of known species.

The information gathered through these efforts may be useful in refining these standards

and guidelines to better provide for these species as part of the adaptive management

process. These surveys are expected to be both extensive and expensive, but the

information from them is critical to successful implementation of ecosystem

management. They will be initiated no later than F.Y. 1996 and are to be completed

within ten years.

Annual status reports are to be submitted to the Regional Ecosystem Office for review

beginning at the end of F.Y. 1995. As experience is acquired with these requirements,

agencies may propose changes to the Regional Ecosystem Office for analysis. These changes

could include changing the schedule, moving a species from one survey strategy to another, or

dropping this mitigation requirement for any species whose status is determined to be more

secure than originally projected. The Regional Ecosystem Office will forward such proposals,

along with recommendations, to the Regional Interagency Executive Committee for action as

appropriate.

Manage Recreation Areas to Minimize Disturbance to Species

This standard and guideline applies throughout all land allocations. This standard and

guideline will benefit a number of fungi and lichen species whose known locations are

predominantly within established recreation sites. This standard and guideline falls within the

category of the survey and manage standard and guideline above, and species to be protected

through this standard and guideline are among those shown in Table C-3 at the end of this

section of these standards and guidelines. Additional information on the habitat requirements

of these species are discussed in Appendix J of the Final SEIS.

Protect Sites From Grazing

This standard and guideline applies throughout all land allocations. This standard and

guideline is designed to benefit mollusks and vascular plants. Known and newly discovered

sites of these species will be protected from grazing by all practicable steps to ensure that the

local populations of the species will not be impacted. Species to be protected through this

standard and guideline are:

Mollusks: Ancotrema voyanum, Monadenia fidelis klamathica, Monadenia fidelis

ochromphalus, Pristiloma articum crateris, Fluminicola n. sp. 1, Fluminicola n. sp. 11,

Fluminicola n. sp. 19, Fluminicola n. sp. 20, Fluminicola n. sp. 3, Fluminicola

seminalis

Vascular Plants: Pedicularis howellii
Standards and Guidelines C-7

Standards and Guidelines for Key Watersheds 

Description

Key Watersheds are not a designated area or matrix, but overlay all of these allocations (see

also the Aquatic Conservation Strategy starting on page B-9 of these standards and

guidelines). All 24.455 million acres of Forest Service, BLM, and other federallyadministered lands within the range of the northern spotted owl are allocated to one of three

watershed categories: Tier 1 Key Watersheds, Tier 2 Key Watersheds, or non-Key

Watersheds (all others). Key Watersheds overlay portions of all six categories of designated

areas and matrix as shown below, and place additional management requirements or

emphasis on activities in those areas.

Acres in each designated area and matrix, by Key and non-Key Watersheds.

 Tier 1 Tier 2 non-Key Total

Designated Areas

 Congressionally Reserved Areas 2,728,000 311,200 4,281,400 7,320,600

 Late-Successional Reserves 3,151,700 279,100 4,000,000 7,430,800

 Adaptive Management Areas 228,100 60,600 1,233,100 1,521,800

 Managed Late-Successional Areas 55,100 0 47,100 102,200

 Administratively Withdrawn Areas 407,900 54,700 1,014,500 1,477,100

 Riparian Reserves (based on sample) 631,000 113,700 1,882,800 2,627,500

Matrix

 Matrix 917,600 182,400 2,875,300 3,975,300

 Total 8,119,400 1,001,700 15,334,200 24,455,300

Standards and Guidelines

Inside Roadless Areas - No new roads will be built in remaining unroaded portions of

inventoried (RARE II) roadless areas.

Outside Roadless Areas - Reduce existing system and nonsystem road mileage. If funding is

insufficient to implement reductions, there will be no net increase in the amount of roads in

Key Watersheds.

Key Watersheds are highest priority for watershed restoration.

Watershed analysis is required prior to management activities, except minor activities such as

those Categorically Excluded under NEPA (and not including timber harvest).

Watershed analysis is required prior to timber harvest.
Standards and Guidelines C-8

Standards and Guidelines for Designated Areas and

Matrix

In addition to the general standards and guidelines and management considerations described

elsewhere in this document, the six categories of designated areas, and matrix, are described

below, along with applicable standards and guidelines for each.

Congressionally Reserved Areas

Acres 

Key and non-Key Watersheds are specified for all areas, and therefore overlay all other land

allocations. Where Key Watersheds occur within Congressionally Reserved Areas, standards

and guidelines for Key Watersheds (see Key Watersheds on page C-7, and the Aquatic

Conservation Strategy starting on page B-9 of these standards and guidelines) apply to the

extent they are consistent with the legislated direction for the Congressionally Reserved Area.

See additional detail under Hierarchy of Standards and Guidelines on page C-1. 

Congressionally Reserved within Tier 1 Key Watersheds ............ 2,728,000

Congressionally Reserved within Tier 2 Key Watersheds ............. 311,200

Congressionally Reserved within non-Key (other) Watersheds ........ 4,281,400

Total Congressionally Reserved acres ........................ 7,320,600

Acreage of Riparian Reserves is not calculated within Congressionally Reserved Areas for

these standards and guidelines. However, Riparian Reserves occur in approximately 40

percent of Congressionally Reserved Areas, and Riparian Reserve standards and guidelines

apply to the extent they are consistent with the legislative direction for the Congressionally

Reserved Area.

Description

These standards and guidelines retain existing land allocations for Congressionally Reserved

Areas. These include lands with congressional designations that normally preclude timber

harvest, as well as other federal lands not administered by the Forest Service or BLM,

including National Parks and Monuments, Wildernesses, Wild and Scenic Rivers, National

Wildlife Refuges, and military reservations. 

Standards and Guidelines

Management of these lands follows direction written in the applicable legislation or plans. 

Direction from these standards and guidelines also applies where it is more restrictive or

provides greater benefits to late-successional forest related species, unless the application of

these standards and guidelines would be contrary to legislative or regulatory language or

intent.
Standards and Guidelines C-9

Late-Successional Reserves

Acres

Key and non-Key Watersheds are specified for all areas, and therefore overlay all other land

allocations. For the portion of Late-Successional Reserves located within Key Watersheds,

standards and guidelines for Key Watersheds (see Key Watersheds on page C-7, and the

Aquatic Conservation Strategy starting on page B-9 of these standards and guidelines), as

well as standards and guidelines for Late-Successional Reserves (listed below) apply. See

additional detail under Hierarchy of Standards and Guidelines on page C-1. 

Late-Successional Reserves within Tier 1 Key Watersheds .............. 3,151,700

Late-Successional Reserves within Tier 2 Key Watersheds ............... 279,100

Late-Successional Reserves within non-Key (other) Watersheds .......... 4,000,000

Total Late-Successional Reserves ........................... 7,430,800

Acreage of Riparian Reserves is not calculated within Late-Successional Reserves for these

standards and guidelines. However, Riparian Reserve standards and guidelines affect

approximately 40 percent of Late-Successional Reserves.

Description

The objective of Late-Successional Reserves is to protect and enhance conditions of latesuccessional and old-growth forest ecosystems, which serve as habitat for late-successional

and old-growth related species including the northern spotted owl.

Late-Successional Reserves have been designated based on five elements: (1) areas mapped

as part of an interacting reserve system; (2) LS/OG 1 and 2 areas within Marbled Murrelet

Zone 1, and certain owl additions, mapped by the Scientific Panel on Late-Successional

Forest Ecosystems (1991); (3) sites occupied by marbled murrelets; (4) known owl activity

centers; and (5) Protection Buffers for specific endemic species identified by the Scientific

Analysis Team (SAT)(1993). Additional areas, such as 600 acres around known sites of

fungus species Oxyporous nobilissimus, are protected under the survey and management

standards and guidelines starting on page C-4 of these standards and guidelines. Details are

as follows. 

1. Mapped Late-Successional Reserves

Most Late-Successional Reserves are mapped areas, shown on the Alternative 9 map that was

included with the Final SEIS and described on page A-6 of these standards and guidelines.

They were designed to incorporate Key Watersheds to the extent possible, while remaining

consistent with other objectives. They also incorporate some or parts of LS/OG1s and

LS/OG2s (most ecologically significant, and ecologically significant late-successional and

old-growth forests, respectively, from the Scientific Panel on Late-Successional Forest

Ecosystems [1991] and some or parts of the Designated Conservation Areas (DCAs) from

the Final Draft Spotted Owl Recovery Plan in the western portion of the range of the northern

spotted owl. 
Standards and Guidelines C-10

2. LS/OG 1s and 2s

Also shown on the Alternative 9 map, all LS/OG1s and LS/OG2s within Marbled Murrelet

Zone 1, except in the Quinault Special Management Area, are Late-Successional Reserve, as

are owl additions mapped by the Scientific Panel on Late-Successional Forest Ecosystems

(1991) within the Finney and Northern Coast Adaptive Management Areas. Where LS/OG

status is used to define the boundaries of a Late-Successional Reserve, the boundaries are

fixed regardless of the future condition of those (or other) stands.

3. Occupied Marbled Murrelet Sites

The area close to marine environments associated with most marbled murrelet activity is

referred to as Marbled Murrelet Zone 1. Zone 1 extends approximately 40 miles inland in

Washington, 35 miles inland in Oregon, 25 miles inland in California north of Fort Bragg,

and 10 miles inland south of Fort Bragg. Zone 2 is defined for survey purposes and does not

affect land allocations. Both Marbled Murrelet Zones 1 and 2 are shown on the Alternative 9

map that was included with the Final SEIS. However, for survey purposes only, some

portions of these zones are being remapped to be consistent with the above description. (See

also page A-6. This remapping does not LS/OGs reserved under #2 above.)

Preproject surveys of marbled murrelet habitat are required according to protocol currently

used by the federal agencies. Current protocol requires 2 years of surveys to assure that no

marbled murrelet nests exist in areas planned for timber harvest. If behavior indicating

occupation is documented (described below), all contiguous existing and recruitment habitat

for marbled murrelets (i.e., stands that are capable of becoming marbled murrelet habitat

within 25 years) within a 0.5-mile radius will be protected. The 0.5-mile radius circle should

be centered on either the behavior indicating occupation, or within 0.5 mile of the location of

the behavior, whichever maximizes interior old-growth habitat. When occupied areas are

close to each other, the 0.5-mile circles may overlap.

Behavior indicating marbled murrelet occupation includes at least one of the following: (1)

discovery of an active nest or a recent nest site as evidenced by a fecal ring or eggshell

fragments; (2) discovery of a chick or eggshell fragments on the forest floor; (3) birds flying

below, through, into, or out of the forest canopy within or adjacent to a stand; (4) birds

perching, landing, or attempting to land on branches; (5) birds calling from a stationary

location within the stand; (6) birds flying in small or large radius circles above the canopy.

4. Known Spotted Owl Activity Centers

This standard and guideline applies to known spotted owl activity centers that are not

protected by Congressionally Reserved Areas, Late-Successional Reserves, Riparian

Reserves, Managed Late-Successional Areas, or Administratively Withdrawn Areas. One

hundred acres of the best northern spotted owl habitat will be retained as close to the nest site

or owl activity center as possible for all known (as of January 1, 1994) spotted owl activity

centers located on federal lands in the matrix and Adaptive Management Areas. This is

intended to preserve an intensively used portion of the breeding season home range. "Activity

center" is defined as an area of concentrated activity of either a pair of spotted owls or a

territorial single owl. Timber management activities within the 100-acre area should comply

with management guidelines for Late-Successional Reserves. Management around this area

will be
Standards and Guidelines C-11

designed to reduce risks of natural disturbance. Because these areas are considered important

to meeting objectives for species other than spotted owls, these areas are to be maintained

even if they become no longer occupied by spotted owls.

5. Protection Buffers

Unmapped Late-Successional Reserves result from the application of Protection Buffers (see

standards and guidelines below).

Standards and Guidelines

Also see Standards and Guidelines Common to all Land Allocations starting on page C-2 of

these standards and guidelines.

Objectives - Late-Successional Reserves are to be managed to protect and enhance

conditions of late-successional and old-growth forest ecosystems, which serve as habitat for

late-successional and old-growth related species including the northern spotted owl. These

reserves are designed to maintain a functional, interacting, late-successional and old-growth

forest ecosystem. See additional information in the Ecological Principles for Management of

Late-Successional Forests discussion in Section B of these standards and guidelines. 

Exceptions - Research Natural Areas and activities required by recovery plans for listed

threatened and endangered species take precedence over Late-Successional Reserve standards

and guidelines. 

Management Assessment for Late-Successional Reserves - A management assessment

should be prepared for each large Late-Successional Reserve (or group of smaller LateSuccessional Reserves) before habitat manipulation activities are designed and implemented.

Land management agencies may choose to develop these assessments as components of

legally-mandated plans (e.g., Forest or District Plans), as part of province-level planning, or

as stand-alone assessments. If developed to stand alone, the assessments should be closely

coordinated with subsequent watershed analysis and province-level planning. Standards and

guidelines should be refined at the province level, prior to development of Late-Successional

Reserve assessments. Late-Successional Reserve assessments should generally include: (1) a

history and inventory of overall vegetative conditions within the reserve, (2) a list of

identified late-successional associated species known to exist within the Late-Successional

Reserve and information on their locations, (3) a history and description of current land uses

within the reserve, (4) a fire management plan, (5) criteria for developing appropriate

treatments, (6) identification of specific areas that could be treated under those criteria, (7) a

proposed implementation schedule tiered to higher order (i.e., larger scale) plans, and (8)

proposed monitoring and evaluation components to help evaluate if future activities are

carried out as intended and achieve desired results. Only in unusual circumstances would

silvicultural treatments, including prescribed fire, precede preparation of this management

assessment. Late-Successional Reserve assessments are subject to review by the Regional

Ecosystem Office. Until Late-Successional Reserve assessments are completed, fire

suppression activities should be guided by land allocation objectives in coordination with

local resource management specialists.
Standards and Guidelines C-12

Occupied Marbled Murrelet Sites - Timber harvest is prohibited within occupied marbled

murrelet habitat at least until completion of the Marbled Murrelet Recovery Plan.

Silvicultural treatments in non-habitat within the 0.5-mile circle must protect or enhance the

suitable or replacement habitat. When objectives of the Marbled Murrelet Recovery Plan

have been identified, management direction will be amended or revised as appropriate.

Silviculture

Thinning or other silvicultural treatments inside reserves are subject to review by the

Regional Ecosystem Office to ensure that the treatments are beneficial to the creation of

late-successional forest conditions. The Regional Ecosystem Office may develop criteria that

would exempt some activities from review. Stand and vegetation management of any kind,

including prescribed burning, is considered a silvicultural treatment. Excepted from review

are reforestation activities legally required by, and planned as part of, existing sold timber

sales, where the reforestation prescription has been modified as appropriate to meet the

objectives of the Late-Successional Reserve.

Activities permitted in the western and eastern portions of the northern spotted owl's range

are described separately below. Salvage of dead trees is described separately below, and is

limited to stand-replacing disturbance events exceeding 10 acres.

West of the Cascades - There is no harvest allowed in stands over 80 years old (110 years in

the Northern Coast Adaptive Management Area). Thinning (precommercial and commercial)

may occur in stands up to 80 years old regardless of the origin of the stands (e.g., plantations

planted after logging or stands naturally regenerated after fire or blowdown). The purpose of

these silvicultural treatments is to benefit the creation and maintenance of late-successional

forest conditions. Examples of silvicultural treatments that may be considered beneficial

include thinnings in existing even-age stands and prescribed burning. For example, some

areas within Late-Successional Reserves are actually young single-species stands. Thinning

these stands can open up the canopy, thereby increasing diversity of plants and animals and

hastening transition to a forest with mature characteristics.

East of the Cascades and in the Oregon and California Klamath Provinces - Given the

increased risk of fire in these areas due to lower moisture conditions and the rapid

accumulation of fuels in the aftermath of insect outbreaks and drought, additional

management activities are allowed in Late-Successional Reserves. Guidelines to reduce risks

of large-scale disturbance are as follows:

Guidelines to Reduce Risks of Large-Scale Disturbance - Large-scale disturbances are

natural events, such as fire, that can eliminate spotted owl habitat on hundreds or

thousands of acres. Certain risk management activities, if properly planned and

implemented, may reduce the probability of these major stand-replacing events. There is

considerable risk of such events in Late-Successional Reserves in the Washington and

Oregon Eastern Cascades, and California Cascades Provinces and a lesser risk in the

Oregon and California Klamath Provinces. Elevated risk levels are attributed to changes

in the characteristics and distribution of the mixed-conifer forests resulting from past

fire 
Standards and Guidelines C-13

protection. These forests occur in drier environments, have had repeated insect

infestations, and are susceptible to major fires. Risk reduction efforts are encouraged

where they are consistent with the overall recommendations in these guidelines.

Silvicultural activities aimed at reducing risk shall focus on younger stands in LateSuccessional Reserves. The objective will be to accelerate development of latesuccessional conditions while making the future stand less susceptible to natural

disturbances. Salvage activities should focus on the reduction of catastrophic insect,

disease, and fire threats. Treatments should be designed to provide effective fuel breaks

wherever possible. However, the scale of salvage and other treatments should not

generally result in degeneration of currently suitable owl habitat or other latesuccessional conditions.

In some Late-Successional Reserves in these provinces, management that goes beyond

these guidelines may be considered. Levels of risk in those Late-Successional Reserves

are particularly high and may require additional measures. Consequently, management

activities designed to reduce risk levels are encouraged in those Late-Successional

Reserves even if a portion of the activities must take place in currently late-successional

habitat. While risk-reduction efforts should generally be focused on young stands,

activities in older stands may be appropriate if: (1) the proposed management activities

will clearly result in greater assurance of long-term maintenance of habitat, (2) the

activities are clearly needed to reduce risks, and (3) the activities will not prevent the

Late-Successional Reserves from playing an effective role in the objectives for which

they were established.

Such activities in older stands may also be undertaken in Late-Successional Reserves in

other provinces if levels of fire risk are particularly high.

Guidelines for Salvage

Salvage of dead trees is based on the following standards and guidelines, and is subject to

review by the Regional Ecosystem Office. The Regional Ecosystem Office may develop

criteria that would exempt some activities from review. Salvage of dead trees is not generally

considered a silvicultural treatment within the context of these standards and guidelines.

Salvage is defined as the removal of trees from an area following a stand-replacing event such

as those caused by wind, fires, insect infestations, volcanic eruptions, or diseases. Salvage

guidelines are intended to prevent negative effects on late-successional habitat, while

permitting some commercial wood volume removal. In some cases, salvage operations may

actually facilitate habitat recovery. For example, excessive amounts of coarse woody debris

may interfere with stand regeneration activities following some disturbances. In other cases,

salvage may help reduce the risk of future stand-replacing disturbances. While priority should

be given to salvage in areas where it will have a positive effect on late-successional forest

habitat, salvage operations should not diminish habitat suitability now or in the future.

Tree mortality is a natural process in a forest ecosystem. Diseased and damaged trees are key

structural components of late-successional forests. Accordingly, management planning for

Late-Successional Reserves must acknowledge the considerable value of retaining dead and 
Standards and Guidelines C-14

dying trees in the forest as well as the benefits from salvage activities.

In all cases, planning for salvage should focus on long-range objectives, which are based on

desired future condition of the forest. Because Late-Successional Reserves have been

established to provide high quality habitat for species associated with late-successional forest

conditions, management following a stand-replacing event should be designed to accelerate or

not impede the development of those conditions. The rate of development of this habitat will

vary among provinces and forest types and will be influenced by a complex interaction of

stand-level factors that include site productivity, population dynamics of live trees and snags,

and decay rates of coarse woody debris. Because there is much to learn about the

development of species associated with these forests and their habitat, it seems prudent to

only allow removal of conservative quantities of salvage material from Late-Successional

Reserves and retain management opportunities until the process is better understood.

The following guidelines are general. Specific guidelines should be developed for each

physiographic province, and possibly for different forest types within provinces.

1. The potential for benefit to species associated with late-successional forest conditions

from salvage is greatest when stand-replacing events are involved. Salvage in disturbed

sites of less than 10 acres is not appropriate because small forest openings are an

important component of old-growth forests. In addition, salvage should occur only in

stands where disturbance has reduced canopy closure to less than 40 percent, because

stands with more closure are likely to provide some value for species associated with these

forests.

2. Surviving trees will provide a significant residual of larger trees in the developing stand. 

In addition, defects caused by fire in residual trees may accelerate development of

structural characteristics suitable for associated species. Also, those damaged trees that

eventually die will provide additional snags. Consequently, all standing live trees should

be retained, including those injured (e.g., scorched) but likely to survive. Inspection of the

cambium layer can provide an indication of potential tree mortality.

3. Snags provide a variety of habitat benefits for a variety of wildlife species associated with

late-successional forests. Accordingly, following stand-replacing disturbance,

management should focus on retaining snags that are likely to persist until latesuccessional conditions have developed and the new stand is again producing large snags.

Late-successional conditions are not associated with stands less than 80 years old.

4. Following a stand-replacing disturbance, management should retain adequate coarse

woody debris quantities in the new stand so that in the future it will still contain amounts

similar to naturally regenerated stands. The analysis that determines the amount of coarse

woody debris to leave must account for the full period of time before the new stand begins

to contribute coarse woody debris. As in the case of snags, province-level specifications

must be provided for this guideline. Because coarse woody debris decay rates, forest

dynamics, and site productivity undoubtedly will vary among provinces and forest types,

the specifications also will vary.

Province-level plans will establish appropriate levels of coarse woody debris and decay 
Standards and Guidelines C-15

rates to be used. Levels will be "typical" and will not require retention of all material

where it is highly concentrated, or too small to contribute to coarse woody debris over the

long timeframes discussed. This standard and guideline represents one item to be

considered and may indeed result in no salvage following windthrow in low density stands.

As for other management activities, it is expected that salvage standards and guidelines

will be refined through the implementation and adaptive management processes.

5. Some salvage that does not meet the preceding guidelines will be allowed when salvage is

essential to reduce the future risk of fire or insect damage to late-successional forest

conditions. This circumstance is most likely to occur in the eastern Oregon Cascades,

eastern Washington Cascades, and California Cascades Provinces, and somewhat less

likely to occur in the Oregon Klamath and California Klamath Provinces. It is important to

understand that some risk associated with fire and insects is acceptable because they are

natural forces influencing late-successional forest development. Consequently, salvage to

reduce such risks should focus only on those areas where there is high risk of large-scale

disturbance.

6. Removal of snags and logs may be necessary to reduce hazards to humans along roads and

trails, and in or adjacent to campgrounds. Where materials must be removed from the site,

as in a campground or on a road, a salvage sale is appropriate. In other areas, such as

along roads, leaving material on site should be considered. Also, material will be left

where available coarse woody debris is inadequate.

7. Where green trees, snags, and logs are present following disturbance, the green-tree and

snag guidelines will be applied first, and completely satisfied where possible. The biomass

left in snags can be credited toward the amount of coarse woody debris biomass needed to

achieve management objectives.

8. These basic guidelines may not be applicable after disturbances in younger stands because

remnant coarse woody debris may be relatively small. In these cases, diameter and

biomass retention guidelines should be developed consistent with the intention of

achieving late-successional forest conditions.

9. Logs present on the forest floor before a disturbance event provide habitat benefits that

are likely to continue. It seldom will be appropriate to remove them. Where these logs are

in an advanced state of decay, they will not be credited toward objectives for coarse woody

debris retention developed after a disturbance event. Advanced state of decay should be

defined as logs not expected to persist to the time when the new stand begins producing

coarse woody debris.

10. The coarse woody debris retained should approximate the species composition of the 

original stand to help replicate preexisting suitable habitat conditions.

11. Some deviation from these general guidelines may be allowed to provide reasonable

access to salvage sites and feasible logging operations. Such deviation should occur on as

small a portion of the area as possible, and should not result in violation of the basic
Standards and Guidelines C-16

intent that late-successional forest habitat or the development of such habitat in the future

should not be impaired throughout the area. While exceptions to the guidelines may be

allowed to provide access and operability, some salvage opportunities will undoubtedly be

foregone because of access, feasibility, and safety concerns.

Standards and Guidelines for Multiple-Use Activities Other Than Silviculture

The following standards and guidelines apply to Late-Successional Reserves and Managed

Late-Successional Areas.

Introduction - As a general guideline, nonsilvicultural activities located inside LateSuccessional Reserves that are neutral or beneficial to the creation and maintenance of latesuccessional habitat are allowed.

While most existing uses and development are envisioned to remain, it may be necessary to

modify or eliminate some current activities in Late-Successional Reserves that pose adverse

impacts. This may require the revision of management guidelines, procedures, or regulations

governing these multiple-use activities. Adjustments in standards and guidelines must be

reviewed by the Regional Ecosystem Office. 

Road Construction and Maintenance - Road construction in Late-Successional Reserves

for silvicultural, salvage, and other activities generally is not recommended unless potential

benefits exceed the costs of habitat impairment. If new roads are necessary to implement a

practice that is otherwise in accordance with these guidelines, they will be kept to a minimum,

be routed through non-late-successional habitat where possible, and be designed to minimize

adverse impacts. Alternative access methods, such as aerial logging, should be considered to

provide access for activities in reserves.

Road maintenance may include felling hazard trees along rights-of-way. Leaving material on

site should be considered if available coarse woody debris is inadequate. Topping trees

should be considered as an alternative to felling.

Fuelwood Gathering - Fuelwood gathering will be permitted only in existing cull decks,

where green trees are marked by silviculturists to thin (consistent with standards and

guidelines), to remove blowdown blocking roads, and in recently harvested timber sale units

where down material will impede scheduled post-sale activities or pose an unacceptable risk

of future large-scale disturbances. In all cases these activities should comply with the

standards and guidelines for salvage and silvicultural activities.

American Indian Uses - The exercise of tribal treaty rights will not be restricted by these

standards and guidelines unless the Regional Interagency Executive Committee determines

that the restriction is (1) reasonable and necessary for preservation of the species at issue, (2)

the conservation purpose of the restriction cannot be achieved solely by regulation of nonIndian activities, (3) the restriction is the least restrictive available to achieve the required

conservation purpose, (4) the restriction does not discriminate against Indian activities either

as stated or as applied, and (5) voluntary tribal conservation measures are not adequate to

achieve the necessary conservation purpose.
Standards and Guidelines C-17

Mining - The impacts of ongoing and proposed mining actions will be assessed, and mineral

activity permits will include appropriate stipulations (e.g., seasonal or other restrictions)

related to all phases of mineral activity. The guiding principle will be to design mitigation

measures that minimize detrimental effects to late-successional habitat.

Developments - Development of new facilities that may adversely affect Late-Successional

Reserves should not be permitted. New development proposals that address public needs or

provide significant public benefits, such as powerlines, pipelines, reservoirs, recreation sites,

or other public works projects will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and may be approved

when adverse effects can be minimized and mitigated. These will be planned to have the least

possible adverse impacts on Late-Successional Reserves. Developments will be located to

avoid degradation of habitat and adverse effects on identified late-successional species.

Existing developments in Late-Successional Reserves such as campgrounds, recreation

residences, ski areas, utility corridors, and electronic sites are considered existing uses with

respect to Late-Successional Reserve objectives, and may remain, consistent with other

standards and guidelines. Routine maintenance of existing facilities is expected to have less

effect on current old-growth conditions than development of new facilities. Maintenance

activities may include felling hazard trees along utility rights-of-way, trails, and other

developed areas.

Land Exchanges - Land exchanges involving Late-Successional Reserves will be considered

if they provide benefits equal to or better than current conditions. Consider land exchanges

especially to improve area, distribution, and quality (e.g., connectivity, shape, contribution to

biodiversity) of Late-Successional Reserves, especially where public and private lands are

intermingled (e.g., checkerboard ownership).

Habitat Improvement Projects - Projects designed to improve conditions for fish, wildlife,

or watersheds should be considered if they provide late-successional habitat benefits or if

their effect on late-successional associated species is negligible. Projects required for

recovery of threatened or endangered species should be considered even if they result in some

reduction of habitat quality for other late-successional species. For example, watershed

rehabilitation projects, such as felling trees along streams, will be coordinated with a wildlife

biologist and may include seasonal restrictions. Design and implement watershed restoration

projects in a manner that is consistent with Late-Successional Reserve objectives.

Range Management - Range-related management that does not adversely affect latesuccessional habitat will be developed in coordination with wildlife and fisheries biologists.

Adjust or eliminate grazing practices that retard or prevent attainment of reserve objectives.

Evaluate effects of existing and proposed livestock management and handling facilities in

reserves to determine if reserve objectives are met. Where objectives cannot be met, relocate

livestock management and/or handling facilities.

Fire Suppression and Prevention - Each Late-Successional Reserve will be included in fire

management planning as part of watershed analysis. Fuels management in Late-Successional

Reserves will utilize minimum impact suppression methods in accordance with guidelines for

reducing risks of large-scale disturbances. Plans for wildfire suppression will emphasize

maintaining late-successional habitat. During actual fire suppression activities, fire managers 
Standards and Guidelines C-18

will consult with resource specialists (e.g., botanists, fisheries and wildlife biologists,

hydrologists) familiar with the area, these standards and guidelines, and their objectives, to

assure that habitat damage is minimized. Until a fire management plan is completed for LateSuccessional Reserves, suppress wildfire to avoid loss of habitat in order to maintain future

management options.

In Late-Successional Reserves, a specific fire management plan will be prepared prior to any

habitat manipulation activities. This plan, prepared during watershed analysis or as an

element of province-level planning or a Late-Successional Reserve assessment, should

specify how hazard reduction and other prescribed fire applications will meet the objectives

of the Late-Successional Reserve. Until the plan is approved, proposed activities will be

subject to review by the Regional Ecosystem Office. The Regional Ecosystem Office may

develop additional guidelines that would exempt some activities from review. In all LateSuccessional Reserves, watershed analysis will provide information to determine the amount

of coarse woody debris to be retained when applying prescribed fire. 

In Riparian and Late-Successional Reserves, the goal of wildfire suppression is to limit the

size of all fires. When watershed analysis, province-level planning, or a Late-Successional

Reserve assessment are completed, some natural fires may be allowed to burn under

prescribed conditions. Rapidly extinguishing smoldering coarse woody debris and duff should

be considered to preserve these ecosystem elements.

Special Forest Products - Special forest products include but are not limited to posts, poles,

rails, landscape transplants, yew bark, shakes, seed cones, Christmas trees, boughs,

mushrooms, fruits, berries, hardwoods, forest greens (e.g., ferns, huckleberry, salal,

beargrass, Oregon grape, and mosses), and medicinal forest products. In all cases, evaluate

whether activities have adverse effects on Late-Successional Reserve objectives. Sales will

ensure resource sustainability and protection of other resource values such as special status

plant or animal species. Where these activities are extensive (e.g., collection of Pacific Yew

bark or fungi), it will be appropriate to evaluate whether they have significant effects on latesuccessional habitat. Restrictions may be appropriate in some cases.

Recreational Uses - Dispersed recreational uses, including hunting and fishing, generally are

consistent with the objectives of Late-Successional Reserves. Use adjustment measures such

as education, use limitations, traffic control devices, or increased maintenance when dispersed

and developed recreation practices retard or prevent attainment of Late-Successional Reserve

objectives.

Research - A variety of wildlife and other research activities may be ongoing and proposed

in late-successional habitat. These activities must be assessed to determine if they are

consistent with Late-Successional Reserve objectives. Some activities (including those within

experimental forests) not otherwise consistent with the objectives may be appropriate,

particularly if the activities will test critical assumptions of these standards and guidelines,

will produce results important for habitat development, or if the activities represent

continuation of long-term research. These activities should only be considered if there are no

equivalent opportunities outside Late-Successional Reserves.
Standards and Guidelines C-19

Current, funded, agency-approved research that meets the above criteria is assumed to

continue if analysis ensures that a significant risk to Aquatic Conservation Strategy

objectives does not exist. Research Stations and other Forest Service and BLM units will,

within 180 days of the signing of the Record of Decision for these standards and guidelines,

submit a brief project summary to the Regional Ecosystem Office of ongoing research

projects that are potentially inconsistent with other standards and guidelines of this document,

but are expected to continue under the above research exception. The Regional Ecosystem

Office may choose to more formally review specific projects, and may recommend to the

Regional Interagency Executive Committee modification, up to and including cancellation, of

those projects having an unacceptable risk to Late-Successional Reserve objectives.

Rights-of-Way, Contracted Rights, Easements, and Special Use Permits - Access to

nonfederal lands through Late-Successional Reserves will be considered and existing rightof-way agreements, contracted rights, easements, and special use permits in LateSuccessional Reserves will be recognized as valid uses. New access proposals may require

mitigation measures to reduce adverse effects on Late-Successional Reserves. In these cases,

alternate routes that avoid late-successional habitat should be considered. If roads must be

routed through a reserve, they will be designed and located to have the least impact on latesuccessional habitat. Review all special use permits and when objectives of Late-Successional

Reserves are not being met, reduce impacts through either modification of existing permits or

education. 

Nonnative Species - In general nonnative species (plant and animal) should not be

introduced into Late-Successional Reserves. If an introduction of nonnative species is

proposed, complete an assessment of impacts and avoid any introduction that would retard or

prevent achievement of Late-Successional Reserve objectives. Evaluate impacts of nonnative

species (plant and animal) currently existing within reserves, and develop plans and

recommendations for eliminating or controlling nonnative species that are inconsistent with

Late-Successional Reserve objectives. These will include an analysis of the effects of

implementing such programs to other species or habitats within Late-Successional Reserves.

Other - Other activities should be evaluated by local interdisciplinary teams and appropriate

guidelines should be written and documented. Activities deemed to have potentially adverse

effects on Late-Successional Reserve objectives are subject to review of the Regional

Ecosystem Office. The Regional Ecosystem Office may develop additional criteria for

exempting some additional activities from review.

Protection Buffers

Protection Buffers are additional standards and guidelines from the Scientific Analysis Team

Report for specific rare and locally endemic species, and other specific species in the upland

forest matrix. The following rare and locally endemic species are likely to be assured viability

if they occur within reserves. However, there might be occupied locations outside these areas

that will be important to protect as well. Protocols for surveys will be developed that will

ensure a high likelihood of locating these occupied sites, and such surveys will be conducted

prior to ground-disturbing activities within the known or suspected ranges and within the

habitat types or vegetation communities occupied by these species, according to the 
Standards and Guidelines C-20

implementation schedule for Survey and Manage components 1 and 2 on pages C-4 and C-5

of these standards and guidelines. When located, the occupied sites need to be protected as

follows.

Nonvascular Plants:

Ptilidium californicum (Liverwort) - This species is rare and has a very limited distribution

in old white fir forests with fallen trees. It occurs on trunks of trees at about 5000-feet

elevation. Mitigation options include finding locations and maintaining stands of overmature

white fir at about 5000-feet elevation for inoculum and dispersal along corridors; and

studying specific distribution patterns. Protect known occupied locations if distribution

patterns are disjunct and highly localized by deferring timber harvest and avoiding removal of

fallen trees and logs.

Ulota meglospora (Moss) - This species occurs in northern California and southwest

Oregon. It is best developed (locally abundant) in very old stands of tanoak, Douglas-fir, and

other conifer species further north, but is generally scarce throughout its range. The species is

poorly known ecologically. Mitigation activities include conducting basic ecological studies,

and surveying for presence, particularly in Oregon. Protect known occupied sites if

distribution patterns are disjunct and highly localized. Defer timber harvest or other activities

which would not maintain desired habitat characteristics and population levels.

Aleuria rhenana (Fungus) - This mushroom is widely distributed but rare and little known

throughout its range, known from one collection from Mt. Rainier National Park. It is a

conifer litter decomposer. Mitigation activities include conducting ecological studies and

surveys to determine localities. Protect known populations if surveys continue to indicate that

the population is rare. Defer ground-disturbing activities.

Otidea leporina, O. onotica, and O. smithii (Fungi) - These mushrooms occur in conifer

duff, and are widespread in distribution but uncommon. They are dependent on older-age

forests. Specific mitigation options include protecting older forests from ground disturbance

where the species are located.

For the plants listed above, it is recommended that Regional or state office-level ecologists or

botanists should: (1) maintain a spatially explicit data base of all known sites in National

Forests and BLM Districts, and (2) develop species or area management plans, to be

implemented under the guidance of the regional botany programs.

Amphibians:

Shasta Salamander - This species is very narrowly distributed, occurring only in localized

populations on the Shasta-Trinity National Forest. Only a small part of its range is included

within Habitat Conservation Areas identified by the Interagency Scientific Committee (1990)

(status within Late-Successional Reserves has not been determined). It occurs in association

with limestone outcrops, protected by an overstory canopy. All known and future localities

must be delineated and protected from timber harvest, mining, quarry activity, and road

building within the delineated site, and a buffer of at least the height of one site-potential tree

or 100 feet horizontal distance, whichever is greater, should surround the outcrop. Additional

surveys conducted using a standardized protocol must be undertaken to identify 
Standards and Guidelines C-21

and delineate all occupied sites within the species' potential range.

Birds:

Great Gray Owl - Within the range of the northern spotted owl, the great gray owl is most

common in lodgepole pine forests adjacent to meadows. However, it is also found in other

coniferous forest types. In some locations, such as on the Willamette National Forest west of

the crest of the Cascade Range, at least some shelterwood harvesting seems to be beneficial

for the species by opening up otherwise closed canopy cover for foraging. In doing so,

consequences to species such as northern goshawk and American marten must be evaluated.

Specific mitigation measures for the great gray owl, within the range of the northern spotted

owl, include the following: provide a no-harvest buffer of 300 feet around meadows and

natural openings and establish 1/4-mile protection zones around known nest sites. Within one

year of the signing of the Record of Decision for these standards and guidelines, develop and

implement a standardized protocol for surveys; survey for nest locations using the protocol.

Protect all future discovered nest sites as previously described.

Adaptive Management Areas

Acres

Key and non-Key Watersheds are specified for all areas, and therefore overlay all other land

allocations. For the portion of Adaptive Management Areas located within Key Watersheds,

standards and guidelines for Key Watersheds (see Key Watersheds on page C-7, and the

Aquatic Conservation Strategy starting on page B-9 of these standards and guidelines), as

well as standards and guidelines for Adaptive Management Areas (listed below) apply.

Adaptive Management Areas within Tier 1 Key Watersheds ............ 228,100

Adaptive Management Areas within Tier 2 Key Watersheds ............. 60,600

Adaptive Management Areas within non-Key (other) Watersheds ...... 1,233,100

Total Adaptive Management Areas ............................... 1,521,800

Acreage of Riparian Reserves is not calculated within Adaptive Management Areas for these

standards and guidelines. However, Riparian Reserve standards and guidelines affect

approximately 40 percent of Adaptive Management Areas.

Introduction

Adaptive Management Areas are landscape units designated to encourage the development

and testing of technical and social approaches to achieving desired ecological, economic, and

other social objectives. Ten areas ranging from about 92,000 to nearly 500,000 acres of

federal lands have been identified. The areas are well distributed in the physiographic

provinces. Most are associated with subregions impacted socially and economically by

reduced timber harvest from the federal lands. The areas provide a diversity of biological

challenges, intermixed land ownerships, natural resource objectives, and social contexts.
Standards and Guidelines C-22

Selection of the Adaptive Management Areas

Adaptive Management Areas were selected to provide opportunities for innovation, provide

examples in major physiographic provinces, and provide a range of technical challenges, from

an emphasis on restoration of late-successional forest conditions and riparian zones to

integration of commercial timber harvest with ecological objectives.

Hierarchy of Standards and Guidelines Within Adaptive

Management Areas

Standards and guidelines for Adaptive Management Areas are on pages D-9 through D-12

and elsewhere in Section D of these standards and guidelines. Also see Standards and

Guidelines Common to all Land Allocations starting on page C-2 of these standards and

guidelines.

Overall, management activities in all the Adaptive Management Areas will be conducted to

achieve the objectives described in these standards and guidelines. Standards and guidelines

for Congressionally Reserved Areas or Late-Successional Reserves must be followed when

they occur within Adaptive Management Areas, except that the Adaptive Management Area

plans for the Finney and Northern Coast Adaptive Management Areas may change the LateSuccessional Reserves in those areas. Flexibility is provided to meet objectives for Riparian

Reserves and Key Watersheds. Full watershed analysis will be conducted prior to new

management activities in identified Key Watersheds within Adaptive Management Areas.

Standards and guidelines of current plans and draft plan preferred alternatives (with

exceptions noted on page C-3 of these standards and guidelines) need to be considered during

planning and implementation of activities within Adaptive Management Areas, and they may

be modified in Adaptive Management Area plans based on site-specific analysis. Otherwise,

standards and guidelines are to be developed to meet the objectives of the Adaptive

Management Area and the overall strategy. Coordination with the Regional Ecosystem Office

is required.

More detailed information regarding Adaptive Management Areas, including complete

standards and guidelines, and a description of each of the ten areas along with the particular

management emphasis for each, is found in Section D of these standards and guidelines.

Managed Late-Successional Areas

Acres

Key and non-Key Watersheds are specified for all areas, and therefore overlay all other land

allocations. For the portion of Managed Late-Successional Areas located within Key

Watersheds, standards and guidelines for Key Watersheds (see Key Watersheds on page C-7,

and the Aquatic Conservation Strategy starting on page B-9 of these standards and

guidelines), as well as standards and guidelines for Managed Late-Successional Areas (listed

below) apply. See additional detail under Hierarchy of Standards and Guidelines on page C-1

of these standards and guidelines. 
Standards and Guidelines C-23

Managed Late-Successional Areas within Tier 1 Key Watersheds ........ 55,100

Managed Late-Successional Areas within Tier 2 Key Watersheds ............. 0

Managed Late-Successional Areas within non-Key (other) Watersheds ..... 47,100

Total Managed Late-Successional Area acres ...................... 102,200

Acreage of Riparian Reserves is not calculated within Managed Late-Successional Areas for

these standards and guidelines. However, Riparian Reserve standards and guidelines affect

approximately 40 percent of Managed Late-Successional Areas.

Because the data for the Modoc National Forest are not in the data base for these standards

and guidelines, three Managed Late-Successional Areas on that forest are not included in the

above acreage.

Description

Managed Late-Successional Areas are similar to Late-Successional Reserves but are

identified for certain owl activity centers on the eastside where regular and frequent fire is a

natural part of the ecosystem. Certain silvicultural treatments and fire hazard reduction

treatments are permitted to help prevent complete stand destruction from large catastrophic

events such as high intensity, high severity fires; or disease or insect epidemics.

Managed Late-Successional Areas have been designated for these standards and guidelines

based on two elements: (1) Managed Pair Areas for known owl pairs and resident singles in

the California Cascades and Washington Eastern Cascades Provinces, from the Final Draft

Spotted Owl Recovery Plan; and (2) Protection Buffers for specific endemic species

identified by the Scientific Analysis Team (1993). Details are as follows.

1. Managed Pair Areas

Managed Late-Successional Areas are specified as shown on the land allocation map (see

page A-6) for known (as of January 1, 1994) northern spotted owl activity centers outside of

other designated areas within the California Cascades and Washington Eastern Cascades

Provinces to supplement the spotted owl reserve network. This includes about 9 known pairs

in California, and 12 known pairs or resident singles in eastern Washington. Delineate an

area surrounding the owl activity center with an acreage at least equal to the median home

range size for pairs. The size of this area will be determined from median home range data for

the province (Table C-1). Use data from the spotted owl study area that is most similar to the

site being considered. The delineated area should be configured so that it contains an amount

of suitable habitat that approximates at least the median amount observed in pair home

ranges for the province (Table C-2).

2. Protection Buffers

Unmapped Managed Late-Successional Areas result from the application of Protection

Buffers (see standards and guidelines below).
Table C-1. Annual home range areas (in acres) of northern spotted owl pairs in different states,

physiographic provinces, and study areas 1

 

 Range 

State Number Forest

 Physiographic Province of Pairs Type Median Min. Max Sources 2 3

 Study Area 

California

 Klamath Province

 Ukonom 9 MC 3,314 2,056 7,823 1

 Mad River 12 MC 2,975 1,803 4,685 1

 Willow Creek 2 MC 1,692 1,258 2,126 2

Oregon

 Klamath Province

 South Umpqua 3 MC 1,411 1,035 1,504 3

 Cow Creek 6 MC 4,106 2,499 7,494 3

 Chetco 4 ME 5,614 5,327 6,197 1

 Coast Range Province

 Tyee 5 DF/HEM 3,387 1,880 8,272 3

 Peterson 4 DF/HEM 6,318 3,483 10,189 3

 Eugene BLM 4 DF/HEM 6,390 3,715 5,180 4

 Other 4 DF/HEM 4,183 2,849 9,748 5 4

 Kellogg 5 MC 4,072 1,618 6,281 3 5

 Western Cascades Province 11 DF/HEM 2,955 1,443 9,758 6,7

Washington

 Western Cascades Province 11 DF/HEM 6,657 2,969 17,942 8,9,10

 Olympic Peninsula Province 10 HEM/DF 14,271 4,497 27,309 9,11

 Eastern Cascades Province 7 MC 7,124 3,694 15,587 11 

Note: this table follows Thomas et al. (1990) with changes based on Forsman (pers. comm., as cited in USDI

unpub.) and Hays (pers. comm., as cited in USDI unpub.).

 Pair home ranges were calculated by delineating 100 percent MCP (minimum convex polygons): total = 1

exclusive area of male and exlusive area of female and the area of overlap shared by the two sexes.

 MC = mixed conifer, ME = mixed conifer/evergreen, DF/HEM = Douglas-fir, western hemlock, HEM/DF 2

= mostly western hemlock with Douglas-fir intermixed.

 1= Paton et al. (1990), 2 = Solis (1983), 3 = Carey (pers. comm., as cited in USDI unpub.), 4 = Thrailkill 3

(pers. comm., as cited in USDI unpub.) and Meslow (pers. comm., as cited in USDI unpub.), 5 = Carey et al.

(1990), 6 = Forsman and Meslow (1985), 7 = Miller (pers. comm., as cited in USDI unpub.), 8 = Allen et al.

(1989), 9 = Hays et al. (1989), 10 = Hamer (pers. comm., as cited in USDI unpub.), 11= Forsman (pers. comm., 

as cited in USDI unpub.).

 Includes four sites in the Oregon Coast Range Province near Roseburg. 4

 This is a relatively dry area bordering the Umpqua River valley, characterized by mixed-conifer forest 5

more typical of the Oregon Klamath Province than the Oregon Coast Range Province.

Source: USDI unpub. p. 27.

Standards and Guidelines C-24
Table C-2. Amounts of old-growth and mature forest (in acres) in annual pair home ranges of

spotted owls, by state, physiographic province and study area

 

 Range 

State Number Forest

 Physiographic Province of Pairs Type Median Min. Max Sources 1 2

 Study Area 

California

 Klamath Province

 Ukonom 9 MC 2,484 1,030 5,654 1,2

 Mad River 12 MC 1,365 835 1,953 1,2

 Willow Creek 2 MC 800 367 1,233 3

Oregon

 Klamath Province

 South Umpqua 3 MC 615 563 768 4

 Cow Creek 6 MC 1,549 1,450 1,983 4

 Chetco 4 ME - - - 1 3

 Coast Range Province

 Tyee 5 DF/HEM 2,031 1,645 3,984 4

 Peterson 4 DF/HEM 2,609 1,284 3,196 4

 Eugene BLM 4 DF/HEM 1,783 799 3,580 5

 Other 4 DF/HEM 2,375 1,795 2,625 6 4

 Kellogg 5 MC 1,018 697 1,983 4 5

 Western Cascades Province 9 DF/HEM 1,796 1,050 3,786 7,8

Washington

 Western Cascades Province 11 DF/HEM 3,281 1,715 8,998 9,10,11

 Olympic Peninsula Province 7 HEM/DF 4,579 2,787 8,448 12

 Eastern Cascades Province 7 MC - - - 12 

Note: this table follows Thomas et al. (1990) with changes based on Forsman (pers. comm., as cited in USDI

unpub.) and Hays (pers. comm., as cited in USDI unpub.).

 MC = mixed conifer, ME = mixed conifer/evergreen, DF/HEM = Douglas-fir, western hemlock, 1 

HEM/DF= mostly western hemlock with Douglas-fir intermixed

 1 = Paton et al. (1990), 2 = Paton (pers. Comm., as cited in USDI unpub.), 3 = Solis, (1983), 4 = Carey (pers. 2 

comm., as cited in USDI unpub.), 5 = Thrailkill (pers. comm., as cited in USDI unpub.) and Meslow (pers. 

comm., as cited in USDI unpub.), 6 = Carey et al. (1990), 7 = Forsman and Meslow (1985), 8 = Miller (pers.

comm., as cited in USDI unpub.), 9 = Allen et al. (1989), 10 = Hays et al. (1989), 11 = Hamer ((pers. comm., as

cited in USDI unpub.), 12 = Forsman (pers. comm., as cited in USDI unpub.)

 Studies provided data for annual home range size; amounts of old-growth and mature forest not yet 3 

available

 Includes four sites in the Oregon Coast Range Province near Roseburg. 4

 This is a relatively dry area bordering the Umpqua River valley, characterized by mixed-conifer forest more 5

typical of the Oregon Klamath Province than the Oregon Coast Range Province.

Source: USDI unpub. p. 28.

Standards and Guidelines C-25
Standards and Guidelines C-26

Standards and Guidelines

Also see Standards and Guidelines Common to all Land Allocations starting on page C-2 of

these standards and guidelines.

Silviculture

Management activities proposed are subject to review by the Regional Ecosystem Office. The

Regional Ecosystem Office may develop criteria that would exempt some activities from

review. This review is especially important because innovative silvicultural techniques may

be applied to manage suitable northern spotted owl habitat through time. These techniques

may benefit from technical review by the Regional Ecosystem Office.

Managed Late-Successional Areas are identified in areas where regular and frequent fire is a

natural part of the ecosystem. The objective for these areas is to produce and maintain an

optimum level of late-successional and old-growth stands on a landscape scale. In these

designated areas, certain silvicultural treatments and fire hazard reduction treatments would

be allowed to help prevent complete stand destruction from large catastrophic events such as

high intensity, high severity fires; or disease or insect epidemics.

Suitable northern spotted owl habitat should be maintained through time using various

management techniques. The objective will be to always maintain an amount of suitable

habitat equal to median amounts observed in pair home ranges in the province. The location

of this acreage may change through time as management is rotated through the area. Some

uncertainty will be accepted in management to provide habitat in these areas. The intent to

accommodate some risk in the managed pair areas should be considered in any Section 7

consultations in these areas.

Silviculture, salvage, and other multiple-use activities for these areas always should be guided

by the objective of maintaining adequate amounts of suitable habitat.

Management Assessment

Each Managed Late-Successional Area or group of smaller Managed Late-Successional

Areas should have a management assessment, as described for Late-Successional Reserves.

Multiple-Use Activities Other Than Silviculture 

Standards and guidelines for multiple-use activities other than silviculture, which are found in

the standards and guidelines for Late-Successional Reserves, also apply to Managed LateSuccessional Areas.

Protection Buffers

The following standards and guidelines incorporated from the Scientific Analysis Team

Report will result in adding unmapped areas to Managed Late-Successional Areas that should

be managed as indicated below. These standards and guidelines are to be applied wherever

the species occurs outside of designated areas. 
Standards and Guidelines C-27

The following rare and locally endemic species are likely to be assured viability if they occur

within designated areas. However, there might be occupied locations outside these areas that

will be important to protect as well. Protocols for surveys will be developed that will ensure a

high likelihood of locating these occupied sites, and such surveys will be conducted prior to

ground-disturbing activities within the known or suspected ranges and within the habitat

types or vegetation communities occupied by these species, according to the implementation

schedule for Survey and Manage components 1, 2, 3, and/or 4 on pages C-4 through 6 of

these standards and guidelines. When located, the occupied sites need to be protected as

follows.

Nonvascular Plants:

Brotherella roellii (Moss) - This very rare species is endemic to the Washington Cascades

north of Snoqualmie Pass. It occupies rotting logs in low-to-mid elevation old-growth stands

having dense shade, closed canopies, and high humidity. Mitigation options include locating

specific populations and protection of large decay class 3, 4, and 5 logs and canopy closure

greater than 70 percent. Defer management activities that conflict with maintaining suitable

habitat characteristics and known populations levels. The implementation schedule for this

species is the same as for survey and manage components 1 and 3.

Buxbaumia piperi, B. viridis, Rhizomnium nudum, Schistostega pennata, and Tetraphis

geniculata (Mosses) - Most of these species are fairly rare (the exception is B. piperi). They

occur on rotten logs and some organic soil, and are shade dependent, occurring in old-growth

forests. S. pennata occurs only in mature western red cedar forests in the Olympic National

Forest and in the Washington Cascades. Mitigation activities include surveying to determine

presence and distribution; and, where located, maintaining decay class 3, 4, and 5 logs and

greater than 70 percent closed-canopy forest habitats for shade. Shelterwood and thinning

prescriptions for timber harvest will cause their demise, as logs dry out. The implementation

schedule for this species is the same as for survey and manage components 1 and 3.

Polyozellus multiplex (Fungus) - Ecologically, this mushroom was considered in the same

species group as Albatrellus caeryliopus and others, listed earlier in the SAT Report under

species aided by marbled murrelet mitigation measures. However, P. multiplex occurs in

higher elevations of the Cascades in silver fir and mixed conifer (and is thus outside the range

of marbled murrelet mitigations). It can be locally abundant and is a mycorrhizal species

important to forest health. Like its group associates, it is a good indicator of old-growth

forests. Mitigation activities for this species include conducting surveys to define its

distribution, and studies to assess its habitat requirements. The implementation schedule for

this species is the same as for survey and manage components 1 and 3.

Sarcosoma mexicana (Fungus) - This mushroom occurs in deep conifer litter layers in older

forests. It is uncommon to rare and is found in the Oregon and Washington Coast Range into

British Columbia. Mitigation activities include surveying for locations and protecting deep

litter layers of older forests where found. Defer prescribed burning of understory or other

activities which would not retain a deep litter layer. The implementation schedule for this

species is the same as for survey and manage component 3.

For the plants listed above, it is recommended that regional and state ecologists or botanists

should: (1) maintain a spatially explicit data base of all known sites in National Forests and

BLM Districts, and (2) develop species or area management plans, to be implemented under 
Standards and Guidelines C-28

the guidance of the regional botany programs.

Amphibians:

Larch Mountain Salamander - Because of the narrow distribution of this species, mostly

within the Columbia River Gorge, primary emphasis should be to survey and protect all

known sites. Sites must be identified based on fall surveys conducted using a standardized

protocol. Known sites are included within boundaries of conservation areas and under these

guidelines, are not to be disturbed. Surveys are needed at additional sites in the forest matrix

along the Columbia River Gorge. Key habitat is mossy talus protected by overstory canopy.

Avoiding any ground-disturbing activity that would disrupt the talus layer where this species

occurs is the primary means of protection. Once sites are identified, maintain 40 percent

canopy closure of trees within the site and within a buffer of at least the height of one sitepotential tree or 100 feet horizontal distance, whichever is greater, surrounding the site.

Larger buffer widths are appropriate upslope from protected sites on steep slopes. Partial

harvest may be possible if canopy closure can be retained; in such cases logging must be

conducted using helicopters or high-lead cable systems to avoid disturbance of the talus layer.

The implementation schedule for this species is the same as for survey and manage

components 1 and 2.

Siskiyou Mountain Salamander - this species occurs within an extremely narrow range on the

Rogue River, Siskiyou, and Klamath National Forests. Its range does not fall within any of

the Habitat Conservation Areas identified by the Interagency Scientific Committee in Oregon.

Additional surveys conducted using a standardized protocol must be undertaken to delineate

range and identify subpopulations. All populations must be protected by delineating an

occupied site and avoiding disturbance of talus throughout the site, especially on moist,

north-facing slopes, particularly in Oregon where Habitat Conservation Areas do not

incorporate species' range. Because this species seems to require cool, moist conditions, a

buffer of at least the height of one site-potential tree or 100 feet horizontal distance,

whichever is greater, surrounding the site, must be retained around the outer periphery of

known sites. Overstory trees must not be removed within the boundary of this buffer. The

implementation schedule for this species is the same as for survey and manage components 1

and 2.

Del Norte Salamander - This species occurs in talus slopes protected by overstory canopy

that maintains cool, moist conditions on the ground. The species is a slope-valley inhabitant,

and sometimes occurs in high numbers near riparian areas. Riparian Reserves, in combination

with Late-Successional Reserves and other reserves, will offer some protection to the species

but significant numbers also occur in upland areas. Additional mitigation options in this

upland matrix include identifying locations (talus areas inhabited by the species) by using a

standardized survey protocol, then protecting the location from ground-disturbing activities.

Designate a buffer of at least the height of one site-potential tree or 100-feet horizontal

distance, whichever is greater, surrounding the location. Within the site and its surrounding

buffer, maintain 40 percent canopy closure and avoid any activities that would directly

disrupt the surface talus layer. Partial harvest within the buffer may be possible if 40 percent

canopy closure can be maintained; in such cases, tree harvest must be conducted using

helicopters or high-lead cable systems to avoid compaction or other disturbance of talus. The

implementation schedule for this species is the same as for survey and manage components 1

and 2.
Standards and Guidelines C-29

Administratively Withdrawn Areas

Acres 

Key and non-Key Watersheds are specified for all areas, and therefore overlay all other land

allocations. For the portion of Administratively Withdrawn Areas located within Key

Watersheds, standards and guidelines for Key Watersheds (see Key Watersheds on page C-7,

and the Aquatic Conservation Strategy starting on page B-9 of these standards and

guideline), as well as standards and guidelines for Administratively Withdrawn Areas (see

below) apply. See additional detail under Hierarchy of Standards and Guidelines on page B-1

of these standards and guidelines.

Administratively Withdrawn Areas within Tier 1 Key Watersheds ........ 407,900

Administratively Withdrawn Areas within Tier 2 Key Watersheds ........ 54,700

Administratively Withdrawn Areas within non-Key (other) Watersheds ... 1,014,500

Total Administratively Withdrawn Area acres ....................... 1,477,100

Acreage of Riparian Reserves is not calculated within Administratively Withdrawn Areas for

these standards and guidelines. However, Riparian Reserve standards and guidelines affect

approximately 40 percent of Administratively Withdrawn Areas.

Description 

Administratively Withdrawn Areas are identified in current Forest and District Plans or draft

plan preferred alternatives and include recreation and visual areas, back country, and other

areas where management emphasis precludes scheduled timber harvest and which are not

included in calculations of allowable sale quantity (ASQ). 

Standards and Guidelines

Also see Standards and Guidelines Common to all Land Allocations starting on page C-2.

Except for the four specific exceptions listed on page C-3 of these standards and guidelines,

Administratively Withdrawn Areas and all other standards and guidelines of the current plans

and draft plan preferred alternatives apply where they are more restrictive or provide greater

benefits to late-successional and old-growth forest related species than other provisions of

these standards and guidelines. (Current plans and draft plan preferred alternatives include

direction from unpublished drafts for some administrative units. See the Current Plans and

Draft Plan Preferred Alternatives discussion on page C-2 of these standards and guidelines.)

While it is recognized that changes in administrative withdrawals may happen during future

plan amendments, many assumptions within these standards and guidelines are based in part

on existing administrative withdrawals. Plan amendments that propose to significantly reduce

protection for late-successional or old-growth forest related species, or reduce protection for

aquatic ecosystems, are subject to review by the Regional Ecosystem Office to determine if

the objectives of these standards and guidelines would be significantly adversely affected.
Standards and Guidelines C-30

Riparian Reserves

Acres 

Key and non-Key Watersheds are specified for all areas, and therefore overlay all other land

allocations. For the portion of Riparian Reserves located within Key Watersheds, standards

and guidelines for Key Watersheds (see Key Watersheds on page C-7, and the Aquatic

Conservation Strategy starting on page B-9 of these standards and guidelines), as well as

standards and guidelines for Riparian Reserves (listed below) apply. See additional detail

under Hierarchy of Standards and Guidelines on page C-1 of these standards and guidelines.

Riparian Reserves within Tier 1 Key Watersheds ..................... 631,000

Riparian Reserves within Tier 2 Key Watersheds .................... 113,700

Riparian Reserves within non-Key (other) Watersheds .............. 1,882,800

Total Riparian Reserve acres (based on samples). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2,627,500

Acreage of Riparian Reserves is calculated after all other designated areas have been

calculated. Thus, the acres shown here are only those acres that are interspersed with matrix.

However, Riparian Reserve standards and guidelines apply in the other designated area

categories.

Description - Riparian Reserve Widths

Riparian Reserves, as described in detail in the Aquatic Conservation Strategy starting on

page B-9 of these standards and guidelines, are specified for five categories of streams or

waterbodies as follows: 

Fish-bearing streams - Riparian Reserves consist of the stream and the area on each

side of the stream extending from the edges of the active stream channel to the top of the

inner gorge, or to the outer edges of the 100-year floodplain, or to the outer edges of

riparian vegetation, or to a distance equal to the height of two site-potential trees, or 300

feet slope distance (600 feet total, including both sides of the stream channel),

whichever is greatest.

Permanently flowing nonfish-bearing streams - Riparian Reserves consist of the

stream and the area on each side of the stream extending from the edges of the active

stream channel to the top of the inner gorge, or to the outer edges of the 100-year

floodplain, or to the outer edges of riparian vegetation, or to a distance equal to the

height of one site-potential tree, or 150 feet slope distance (300 feet total, including both

sides of the stream channel), whichever is greatest.

Constructed ponds and reservoirs, and wetlands greater than 1 acre - Riparian

Reserves consist of the body of water or wetland and: the area to the outer edges of the

riparian vegetation, or to the extent of seasonally saturated soil, or the extent of unstable

and potentially unstable areas, or to a distance equal to the height of one site-potential

tree, or 150 feet slope distance from the edge of the wetland greater than 
Standards and Guidelines C-31

1 acre or the maximum pool elevation of constructed ponds and reservoirs, whichever is

greatest.

Lakes and natural ponds - Riparian Reserves consist of the body of water and: the area

to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, or to the extent of seasonally saturated soil,

or to the extent of unstable and potentially unstable areas, or to a distance equal to the

height of two site-potential trees, or 300 feet slope distance, whichever is greatest.

Seasonally flowing or intermittent streams, wetlands less than 1 acre, and unstable

and potentially unstable areas - This category applies to features with high variability

in size and site-specific characteristics. At a minimum, the Riparian Reserves must

include:

The extent of unstable and potentially unstable areas (including earthflows), 

The stream channel and extend to the top of the inner gorge,

The stream channel or wetland and the area from the edges of the stream

channel or wetland to the outer edges of the riparian vegetation, and

Extension from the edges of the stream channel to a distance equal to the

height of one site-potential tree, or 100 feet slope distance, whichever is

greatest.

A site-potential tree height is the average maximum height of the tallest dominant trees (200

years or older) for a given site class.

Intermittent streams are defined as any nonpermanent flowing drainage feature having a

definable channel and evidence of annual scour or deposition. This includes what are

sometimes referred to as ephemeral streams if they meet these two physical criteria.

Standards and Guidelines

Also see Standards and Guidelines Common to all Land Allocations starting on page C-2 of

these standards and guidelines.

As a general rule, standards and guidelines for Riparian Reserves prohibit or regulate

activities in Riparian Reserves that retard or prevent attainment of the Aquatic Conservation

Strategy objectives. Watershed analysis and appropriate NEPA compliance is required to

change Riparian Reserve boundaries in all watersheds.

Timber Management

TM-1. Prohibit timber harvest, including fuelwood cutting, in Riparian Reserves, except as

described below. Riparian Reserve acres shall not be included in calculations of the timber

base.
Standards and Guidelines C-32

a. Where catastrophic events such as fire, flooding, volcanic, wind, or insect damage result

in degraded riparian conditions, allow salvage and fuelwood cutting if required to attain

Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. 

b. Salvage trees only when watershed analysis determines that present and future coarse

woody debris needs are met and other Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives are not

adversely affected.

c. Apply silvicultural practices for Riparian Reserves to control stocking, reestablish and

manage stands, and acquire desired vegetation characteristics needed to attain Aquatic

Conservation Strategy objectives.

Roads Management

RF-1. Federal, state, and county agencies should cooperate to achieve consistency in road

design, operation, and maintenance necessary to attain Aquatic Conservation Strategy

objectives.

RF-2. For each existing or planned road, meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives by:

a. minimizing road and landing locations in Riparian Reserves.

b. completing watershed analyses (including appropriate geotechnical analyses) prior to

construction of new roads or landings in Riparian Reserves.

c. preparing road design criteria, elements, and standards that govern construction and

reconstruction.

d. preparing operation and maintenance criteria that govern road operation, maintenance,

and management.

e. minimizing disruption of natural hydrologic flow paths, including diversion of

streamflow and interception of surface and subsurface flow.

f. restricting sidecasting as necessary to prevent the introduction of sediment to streams.

g. avoiding wetlands entirely when constructing new roads.

RF-3. Determine the influence of each road on the Aquatic Conservation Strategy

objectives through watershed analysis. Meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives by:

a. reconstructing roads and associated drainage features that pose a substantial risk.

b. prioritizing reconstruction based on current and potential impact to riparian resources

and the ecological value of the riparian resources affected.
Standards and Guidelines C-33

c. closing and stabilizing, or obliterating and stabilizing roads based on the ongoing and

potential effects to Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives and considering short-term

and long-term transportation needs.

RF-4. New culverts, bridges and other stream crossings shall be constructed, and existing

culverts, bridges and other stream crossings determined to pose a substantial risk to riparian

conditions will be improved, to accommodate at least the 100-year flood, including

associated bedload and debris. Priority for upgrading will be based on the potential impact

and the ecological value of the riparian resources affected. Crossings will be constructed and

maintained to prevent diversion of streamflow out of the channel and down the road in the

event of crossing failure.

RF-5. Minimize sediment delivery to streams from roads. Outsloping of the roadway

surface is preferred, except in cases where outsloping would increase sediment delivery to

streams or where outsloping is unfeasible or unsafe. Route road drainage away from

potentially unstable channels, fills, and hillslopes.

RF-6. Provide and maintain fish passage at all road crossings of existing and potential

fish-bearing streams.

RF-7. Develop and implement a Road Management Plan or a Transportation Management

Plan that will meet the Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. As a minimum, this plan

shall include provisions for the following activities:

a. inspections and maintenance during storm events.

b. inspections and maintenance after storm events.

c. road operation and maintenance, giving high priority to identifying and correcting road

drainage problems that contribute to degrading riparian resources.

d. traffic regulation during wet periods to prevent damage to riparian resources.

e. establish the purpose of each road by developing the Road Management Objective.

Grazing Management

GM-1. Adjust grazing practices to eliminate impacts that retard or prevent attainment

of Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. If adjusting practices is not effective, eliminate

grazing.

GM-2. Locate new livestock handling and/or management facilities outside Riparian

Reserves. For existing livestock handling facilities inside the Riparian Reserve, ensure that

Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives are met. Where these objectives cannot be met,

require relocation or removal of such facilities.
Standards and Guidelines C-34

GM-3. Limit livestock trailing, bedding, watering, loading, and other handling efforts

to those areas and times that will ensure Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives are met. 

Recreation Management

RM-1. New recreational facilities within Riparian Reserves, including trails and dispersed

sites, should be designed to not prevent meeting Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

Construction of these facilities should not prevent future attainment of these objectives. For

existing recreation facilities within Riparian Reserves, evaluate and mitigate impact to

ensure that these do not prevent, and to the extent practicable contribute to, attainment of

Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

RM-2. Adjust dispersed and developed recreation practices that retard or prevent attainment

of Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. Where adjustment measures such as education,

use limitations, traffic control devices, increased maintenance, relocation of facilities, and/or

specific site closures are not effective, eliminate the practice or occupancy. 

RM-3. Wild and Scenic Rivers and Wilderness management plans will address attainment of

Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

Minerals Management

MM-1. Require a reclamation plan, approved Plan of Operations, and reclamation bond for

all minerals operations that include Riparian Reserves. Such plans and bonds must address

the costs of removing facilities, equipment, and materials; recontouring disturbed areas to

near pre-mining topography; isolating and neutralizing or removing toxic or potentially toxic

materials; salvage and replacement of topsoil; and seedbed preparation and revegetation to

meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

MM-2. Locate structures, support facilities, and roads outside Riparian Reserves. Where no

alternative to siting facilities in Riparian Reserves exists, locate them in a way compatible

with Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. Road construction will be kept to the

minimum necessary for the approved mineral activity. Such roads will be constructed and

maintained to meet roads management standards and to minimize damage to resources in the

Riparian Reserve. When a road is no longer required for mineral or land management

activities, it will be closed, obliterated, and stabilized.

MM-3. Prohibit solid and sanitary waste facilities in Riparian Reserves. If no alternative to

locating mine waste (waste rock, spent ore, tailings) facilities in Riparian Reserves exists,

and releases can be prevented, and stability can be ensured, then:

a. analyze the waste material using the best conventional sampling methods and analytic

techniques to determine its chemical and physical stability characteristics.
Standards and Guidelines C-35

b. locate and design the waste facilities using best conventional techniques to ensure mass

stability and prevent the release of acid or toxic materials. If the best conventional

technology is not sufficient to prevent such releases and ensure stability over the long

term, prohibit such facilities in Riparian Reserves. 

c. monitor waste and waste facilities after operations to ensure chemical and physical

stability and to meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

d. reclaim waste facilities after operations to ensure chemical and physical stability and to

meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

e. require reclamation bonds adequate to ensure long-term chemical and physical stability

of mine waste facilities. 

MM-4. For leasable minerals, prohibit surface occupancy within Riparian Reserves for oil,

gas, and geothermal exploration and development activities where leases do not already

exist. Where possible, adjust the operating plans of existing contracts to eliminate impacts

that retard or prevent the attainment of Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. 

MM-5. Salable mineral activities such as sand and gravel mining and extraction within

Riparian Reserves will occur only if Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives can be met. 

MM-6. Include inspection and monitoring requirements in mineral plans, leases or permits.

Evaluate the results of inspection and monitoring to effect the modification of mineral plans,

leases and permits as needed to eliminate impacts that retard or prevent attainment of

Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

Fire/Fuels Management

FM-1. Design fuel treatment and fire suppression strategies, practices, and activities to meet

Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives, and to minimize disturbance of riparian ground

cover and vegetation. Strategies should recognize the role of fire in ecosystem function and

identify those instances where fire suppression or fuels management activities could be

damaging to long-term ecosystem function.

FM-2. Locate incident bases, camps, helibases, staging areas, helispots and other centers for

incident activities outside Riparian Reserves. If the only suitable location for such activities

is within the Riparian Reserve, an exemption may be granted following review and

recommendation by a resource advisor. The advisor will prescribe the location, use

conditions, and rehabilitation requirements. Use an interdisciplinary team to predetermine

suitable incident base and helibase locations.

FM-3. Minimize delivery of chemical retardant, foam, or additives to surface waters. An

exception may be warranted in situations where overriding immediate safety imperatives

exist, or, following review and recommendation by a resource advisor, when an escape

would cause more long-term damage.
Standards and Guidelines C-36

FM-4. Design prescribed burn projects and prescriptions to contribute to attainment of

Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. 

FM-5. Immediately establish an emergency team to develop a rehabilitation treatment plan

needed to attain Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives whenever Riparian Reserves are

significantly damaged by wildfire or a prescribed fire burning outside prescribed parameters.

Other - In Riparian Reserves, the goal of wildfire suppression is to limit the size of all fires.

When watershed and/or landscape analysis, or province-level plans are completed and

approved, some natural fires may be allowed to burn under prescribed conditions. Rapidly

extinguishing smoldering coarse woody debris and duff should be considered to preserve

these ecosystem elements. In Riparian Reserves, water drafting sites should be located and

managed to minimize adverse effects on riparian habitat and water quality, as consistent

with Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

Lands

LH-1. Identify in-stream flows needed to maintain riparian resources, channel conditions,

and fish passage.

LH-2. Tier 1 Key Watersheds: For hydroelectric and other surface water development

proposals, require in-stream flows and habitat conditions that maintain or restore riparian

resources, favorable channel conditions, and fish passage. Coordinate this process with the

appropriate state agencies. During relicensing of hydroelectric projects, provide written and

timely license conditions to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) that require

flows and habitat conditions that maintain or restore riparian resources and channel integrity.

Coordinate relicensing projects with the appropriate state agencies.

For all other watersheds: For hydroelectric and other surface water development proposals,

give priority emphasis to in-stream flows and habitat conditions that maintain or restore

riparian resources, favorable channel conditions, and fish passage. Coordinate this process

with the appropriate state agencies. During relicensing of hydroelectric projects, provide

written and timely license conditions to FERC that emphasize in-stream flows and habitat

conditions that maintain or restore riparian resources and channel integrity. Coordinate

relicensing projects with the appropriate state agencies.

LH-3. Locate new support facilities outside Riparian Reserves. For existing support

facilities inside Riparian Reserves that are essential to proper management, provide

recommendations to FERC that ensure Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives are met.

Where these objectives cannot be met, provide recommendations to FERC that such support

facilities should be relocated. Existing support facilities that must be located in the Riparian

Reserves will be located, operated, and maintained with an emphasis to eliminate adverse

effects that retard or prevent attainment of Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.
Standards and Guidelines C-37

LH-4. For activities other than surface water developments, issue leases, permits,

rights-of-way, and easements to avoid adverse effects that retard or prevent attainment of

Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. Adjust existing leases, permits, rights-of-way,

and easements to eliminate adverse effects that retard or prevent the attainment of Aquatic

Conservation Strategy objectives. If adjustments are not effective, eliminate the activity.

Priority for modifying existing leases, permits, rights-of-way and easements will be based on

the actual or potential impact and the ecological value of the riparian resources affected. 

LH-5. Use land acquisition, exchange, and conservation easements to meet Aquatic

Conservation Strategy objectives and facilitate restoration of fish stocks and other species at

risk of extinction. 

General Riparian Area Management 

RA-1. Identify and attempt to secure in-stream flows needed to maintain riparian resources,

channel conditions, and aquatic habitat. 

RA-2 Fell trees in Riparian Reserves when they pose a safety risk. Keep felled trees on-site

when needed to meet coarse woody debris objectives. 

RA-3. Herbicides, insecticides, and other toxicants, and other chemicals shall be applied

only in a manner that avoids impacts that retard or prevent attainment of Aquatic

Conservation Strategy objectives.

RA-4. Locate water drafting sites to minimize adverse effects on stream channel stability,

sedimentation, and in-stream flows needed to maintain riparian resources, channel

conditions, and fish habitat.

Watershed and Habitat Restoration

WR-1. Design and implement watershed restoration projects in a manner that

promotes long-term ecological integrity of ecosystems, conserves the genetic integrity of

native species, and attains Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

WR-2. Cooperate with federal, state, local, and tribal agencies, and private

landowners to develop watershed-based Coordinated Resource Management Plans or other

cooperative agreements to meet Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

WR-3. Do not use mitigation or planned restoration as a substitute for preventing

habitat degradation.

Fish and Wildlife Management

FW-1. Design and implement fish and wildlife habitat restoration and enhancement

activities in a manner that contributes to attainment of Aquatic Conservation Strategy

objectives.
Standards and Guidelines C-38

FW-2. Design, construct and operate fish and wildlife interpretive and other

user-enhancement facilities in a manner that does not retard or prevent attainment of Aquatic

Conservation Strategy objectives. For existing fish and wildlife interpretative and other

user-enhancement facilities inside Riparian Reserves, ensure that Aquatic Conservation

Strategy objectives are met. Where Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives cannot be met,

relocate or close such facilities.

FW-3. Cooperate with federal, tribal, and state wildlife management agencies to identify and

eliminate wild ungulate impacts that are inconsistent with attainment of Aquatic

Conservation Strategy objectives.

FW-4. Cooperate with federal, tribal, and state fish management agencies to identify and

eliminate impacts associated with habitat manipulation, fish stocking, harvest and poaching

that threaten the continued existence and distribution of native fish stocks occurring on

federal lands.

Research

RS-1. A variety of research activities may be ongoing and proposed in Key Watersheds and

Riparian Reserves. These activities must be analyzed to ensure that significant risk to the

watershed values does not exist. If significant risk is present and cannot be mitigated, study

sites must be relocated. Some activities not otherwise consistent with the objectives may be

appropriate, particularly if the activities will test critical assumptions of these standards and

guidelines; will produce results important for establishing or accelerating vegetation and

structural characteristics for maintaining or restoring aquatic and riparian ecosystems; or the

activities represent continuation of long-term research. These activities should be considered

only if there are no equivalent opportunities outside of Key Watersheds and Riparian

Reserves.

RS-2. Current, funded, agency-approved research, which meets the above criteria, is

assumed to continue if analysis ensures that a significant risk to Aquatic Conservation

Strategy objectives does not exist. Research Stations and other Forest Service and BLM

units will, within 180 days of the signing of the Record of Decision adopting these standards

and guidelines, submit a brief project summary to the Regional Ecosystem Office of ongoing

research projects that are potentially inconsistent with other standards and guidelines but are

expected to continue under the above research exception. The Regional Ecosystem Office

may choose to more formally review specific projects, and may recommend to the Regional

Interagency Executive Committee modification, up to and including cancellation, of those

projects having an unacceptable risk to Key Watersheds and Riparian Reserves. Risk will be

considered within the context of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.
Standards and Guidelines C-39

Matrix

Acres 

Key and non-Key Watersheds are specified for all areas, and therefore overlay all other land

allocations. For the portion of matrix located within Key Watersheds, standards and

guidelines for Key Watersheds (see Key Watersheds on page C-7, and the Aquatic

Conservation Strategy starting on page B-9 of these standards and guidelines), as well as

standards and guidelines for matrix (listed below) apply. See additional detail under

Hierarchy of Standards and Guidelines on page C-1 of these standards and guidelines. 

Matrix within Tier 1 Key Watershed ............................... 917,600

Matrix within Tier 2 Key Watershed ............................... 182,400

Matrix within non-Key (other) Watershed ........................ 2,875,300

Total matrix acres ........................................... 3,975,300

The above acreage is calculated after the Riparian Reserve acreage has been estimated and

displayed elsewhere in these standards and guidelines, and thus does not include any

Riparian Reserves.

Description

The matrix consists of those federal lands outside the six categories of designated areas

(Congressionally Reserved Areas, Late-Successional Reserves, Adaptive Management

Areas, Managed Late-Successional Areas, Administratively Withdrawn Areas, and Riparian

Reserves). Most timber harvest and other silvicultural activities would be conducted in that

portion of the matrix with suitable forest lands, according to standards and guidelines. Most

scheduled timber harvest (that contributing to the probable sale quantity [PSQ] not taking

place in Adaptive Management Areas) takes place in the matrix. The matrix includes

nonforested areas, and forested areas that are technically unsuitable for timber production,

and therefore do not contribute to PSQ.

Standards and guidelines for unmapped Late-Successional Reserves and Managed LateSuccessional Areas prohibit or limit activities that otherwise appear to be within the matrix.

Unmapped Late-Successional Reserves are identified for all LS/OG 1s and 2s within

Marbled Murrelet Zone 1, around occupied marbled murrelet sites, and for 100 acres around

known spotted owl activity centers. Unmapped Late-Successional Reserves and Managed

Late-Successional Areas are identified for certain Protection Buffers. See the LateSuccessional Reserve and Managed Late-Successional Area descriptions earlier in this

section for specific information. 

Standards and Guidelines

Also see Standards and Guidelines Common to all Land Allocations starting on page C-2 of

these standards and guidelines.
Standards and Guidelines C-40

Provide specified amounts of coarse woody debris in matrix management.

A renewable supply of large down logs is critical for maintaining populations of fungi,

arthropods, bryophytes and various other organisms that use this habitat structure. Provision

of coarse woody debris is also a key standard and guideline for American marten, fisher, two

amphibians, and two species of vascular plants. The objective is to provide coarse woody

debris well distributed across the landscape in a manner which meets the needs of species

and provides for ecological functions. Standards and guidelines should provide for

appropriate coarse woody debris quantity, quality (such as species, decay stage and size) and

distribution. Models for computing expected numbers and sizes of logs should be developed

for groups of plant associations and stand types which can be used as a baseline for

managers to develop prescriptions for landscape management. An important factor is to

provide the coarse woody debris within a forest patch so that the appropriate microclimate

for various organisms that use this substrate is available. Coarse woody debris that is

already on the ground needs to be retained and protected from disturbance to the greatest

extent possible during logging and other land management activities that might destroy the

integrity of the substrate. Scattered green trees will provide a future supply of down woody

material as the stand regenerates and are important in providing for the distribution of this

substrate throughout the managed landscape.

Specific measures for coarse woody debris follow. These measures are intended to be

applied in matrix forests. The intent of the measures must also be met in Adaptive

Management Areas, but specific standards and guidelines are not prescribed for those areas.

A. Manage to provide a renewable supply of large down logs well distributed across the

matrix landscape in a manner that meets the needs of species and provides for ecological

functions. Develop models for groups of plant associations and stand types that can be

used as a baseline for developing prescriptions.

B. Until standards are developed as described above, the following guidelines apply in

areas of regeneration harvests: for northern California National Forests, use the Draft

Forest Plan standards and guidelines for down logs; for western Oregon and Washington

north of and including the Willamette National Forest and the Eugene BLM District,

leave 240 linear feet of logs per acre greater than or equal to 20 inches in diameter. Logs

less than 20 feet in length cannot be credited toward this total. In eastern Oregon and

Washington, and western Oregon south of the Willamette National Forest and the

Eugene BLM District, a minimum of 120 linear feet of logs per acre greater than or

equal to 16 inches in diameter and 16 feet long should be retained. Decay class 1 and 2

logs can be counted towards these totals. Down logs should reflect the species mix of the

original stand. In all cases, standards and guidelines from current plans and draft plan

preferred alternatives apply if they provide greater amounts. In areas of partial harvest,

the same basic guidelines should be applied, but they should be modified to reflect the

timing of stand development cycles where partial harvesting is practiced. 

C. Coarse woody debris already on the ground should be retained and protected to the

greatest extent possible from disturbance during treatment (e.g., slash burning and

yarding) which might otherwise destroy the integrity of the substrate. 
Standards and Guidelines C-41

D. Down logs should be left within forest patches that are retained under green-tree

retention guidelines in order to provide the microclimate that is appropriate for various

organisms that use this substrate. 

E. As with all standards and guidelines, these guidelines are meant to provide initial

guidance, but further refinement will be required for specific geographic areas. This can

be accomplished through planning based on watershed analysis, and the adaptive

management process.

Emphasize green-tree and snag retention in matrix management.

For many species, benefits will be greatest if trees are retained in patches rather than singly.

Because very small patches do not provide suitable microclimates for many of these

organisms, patches should generally be larger than 2.5 acres.

Although many species would benefit from retention of patches, others may be favored by

retention of single trees. Within the minimum constraints described in item C below, the

relative proportion of patches vs. single trees retained must reflect local knowledge of

individual species needs. 

Retained patches should be protected for multiple rotations to provide support for those

organisms that require very old forests.

Specific measures for green tree and snag retention follow. These measures are intended to

be applied throughout the matrix forests. Their intent should be met in Adaptive

Management Areas, but standards and guidelines are not prescribed for those areas.

A. For lands administered by the BLM in Oregon, follow standards and guidelines

described separately for those lands below. For lands administered by the BLM in

California, manage according to existing District Plans, which emphasize retention of

old growth.

B. For all other lands, retain at least 15 percent of the area associated with each cutting unit

(stand) except within the Oregon Coast Range and Olympic Peninsula Provinces. On the

Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, this retention guideline does not apply, but sitespecific prescriptions should be developed to maintain biological diversity and

ecosystem function, including retention of green trees (singly and in patches), snags and

down logs. Exceptions are made for the Oregon Coast Range and Olympic Peninsula

Provinces because substantial retention is provided by marbled murrelet and riparian

protection measures. If, as a result of watershed analysis or any future delisting of the

murrelet, protection is reduced significantly, green-tree retention standards and

guidelines may be required in these provinces. Only matrix lands count toward the 15

percent.

This limitation does not apply to intermediate harvests (thinnings) in even-age young

stands because leaving untreated portions of young stands would retard stand

development and be detrimental to the objective of creating late-successional patches.

C. As a general guide, 70 percent of the total area to be retained should be aggregates of

moderate to larger size (0.2 to 1 hectare or more) with the remainder as dispersed 
Standards and Guidelines C-42

structures (individual trees, and possible including smaller clumps less than 0.2 ha.)

Larger aggregates may be particularly important where adjacent areas have little latesuccessional habitat. To the extent possible, patches and dispersed retention should

include the largest, oldest live trees, decadent or leaning trees, and hard snags occurring

in the unit. Patches should be retained indefinitely.

D. As a minimum, snags are to be retained within the harvest unit at levels sufficient to

support species of cavity-nesting birds at 40 percent of potential population levels based

on published guidelines and models. The objective is to meet the 40 percent minimum

standard throughout the matrix, with per-acre requirements met on average areas no

larger than 40 acres. To the extent possible, snag management within harvest units

should occur within the areas of green-tree retention. The needs of bats should also be

considered in these standards and guidelines as those needs become better known. Snag

recruitment trees left to meet an identified, near-term (less than 3 decades) snag deficit

do not count toward green-tree retention requirements.

Standards and Guidelines Specific to Northern Spotted Owl Habitat for Lands

Administered by the Bureau of Land Management in Oregon - For lands administered

by the BLM in Oregon north of Grants Pass (see General Forest Management Area

boundary in the Medford District Draft Resource Management Plan), and including the

entire Coos Bay District, provide 640-acre blocks (Connectivity/Diversity Blocks) as

currently spaced, that are managed on 150-year rotation. When an area is cut, 12 to 18 green

trees per acre will be retained. There must be 25 to 30 percent of each block in

late-successional forest at any point in time. Late-successional stands within Riparian

Reserves contribute toward this percentage. In the remainder of the matrix (General Forest

Management Area), retain 6 to 8 green trees per acre in harvest units.

For lands administered by the BLM in Oregon south of Grants Pass, retain 16 to 25 large

green trees per acre in harvest units.

Designated Conservation Areas, Reserved Pair Areas, and Residual Habitat Areas from the

Final Draft Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl and other standards and

guidelines of the BLM's Revised Preferred Alternative that are specific to northern spotted

owls do not apply except as described below. 

a. For lands administered by the BLM north of the Grants Pass line, and including all of

the Coos Bay District, outside of the South Willamette-North Umpqua Area of Concern,

implement the Connectivity/Diversity Block design from the Revised Preferred

Alternative with District modifications that have been approved by the Scientific

Advisory Group.

b. Apply additional matrix standards and guidelines to maintain the connectivity value of

the I-5 Corridor (South Willamette/North Umpqua Area of Concern) in the Eugene

District. Specifically, apply the Connectivity/Diversity Block standards and guidelines to

all lands in the area designated as Deferred and Non-Deferred Old-Growth Emphasis

Areas in the BLM's Revised Preferred Alternative.

Connectivity/Diversity Block standards or guidelines call for 150-year area control

rotations. Overall, 25 to 30 percent of each block will be maintained in late-successional 
Standards and Guidelines C-43

condition, and periodic timber sales will leave 12 to 18 green trees per acre. Riparian

Reserves count toward the 25 to 30 percent if they are in late-successional condition.

Riparian Reserves do not count toward the 150-year rotation of the area control.

c. Apply Connectivity/Diversity Block standards and guidelines to the entire area of seven

Managed Pair Areas and two Reserved Pair Areas near the Medford/Roseburg District

boundary and on a portion of the Coos Bay District surrounding Designated

Conservation Area OD-33.

Provide additional protection for caves, mines, and abandoned wooden bridges and

buildings that are used as roost sites for bats.

Most bat species occurring in the Pacific Northwest roost and hibernate in crevices in

protected sites. Suitable roost sites and hibernacula, however, fall within a narrow range of

temperature and moisture conditions. Sites commonly used by bats include caves, mines,

snags and decadent trees, wooden bridges, and old buildings. Additional provisions for the

retention of large snags and decadent trees are included in the standard and guideline for

green tree patches in the matrix. Caves, mines, and abandoned wooden bridges and

buildings, however, are extremely important roost and hibernation sites, and require

additional protection to ensure that their value as habitat is maintained.

This provision is intended to apply in matrix forests and Adaptive Management Areas, and

elements such as protection of known occupied caves should be considered for other land

allocations. Conduct surveys of crevices in caves, mines, and abandoned wooden bridges and

buildings for the presence of roosting bats, including fringed myotis, silver-haired bats, longeared myotis, long-legged myotis, and pallid bats. For the purposes of this standard and

guideline, caves are defined as in the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988 as "any

naturally occurring void, cavity, recess, or system of interconnected passages which occur

beneath the surface of the earth or within a cliff or ledge ( . . . but not including any . . . manmade excavation) and which is large enough to permit an individual to enter, whether or not

the entrance is naturally formed or man-made." Searches should be conducted during the day

in the summer (to locate day roosts and maternity colonies), at night during the late summer

and fall (to locate night roosts, which are important for reproduction), and during the day in

the winter (to locate hibernacula). If bats are found, identify the species using the site and

determine for what purpose it is being used by bats. As an interim measure, timber harvest is

prohibited within 250 feet of sites containing bats. Management standards and guidelines

that may be included as mitigation measures in project or activity plans will be developed for

the site. These standards will be developed following an inventory and mapping of resources.

The purpose of the standards and guidelines will be protection of the site from destruction,

vandalism, disturbance from road construction or blasting, or any other activity that could

change cave or mine temperatures or drainage patterns. The size of the buffer, and types of

activities allowed within the buffer, may be modified through the standards developed for the

specific site. Retention of abandoned bridges or buildings must be made contingent on safety

concerns. 
Standards and Guidelines C-44

Townsend's big-eared bats are of concern to state wildlife agencies in both Washington and

Oregon. These bats are strongly associated with caves, and are extremely sensitive to

disturbance, especially from recreational cavers. When Townsend's big-eared bats are found

occupying caves or mines on federal land, the appropriate agency should be notified, and

management prescriptions for that site should include special consideration for potential

impacts on this species. 

Modify site treatment practices, particularly the use of fire and pesticides, and modify

harvest methods to minimize soil and litter disturbance.

Many species of soil and litter-dwelling organisms, such as fungi and arthropods, are

sensitive to soil and litter disturbance. Site treatments should be prescribed which will

minimize intensive burning, unless appropriate for certain specific habitats, communities or

stand conditions. Prescribed fires should be planned to minimize the consumption of litter

and coarse woody debris. Other aspects to this standard and guideline include minimizing

soil and litter disturbance that may occur as a result of yarding and operation of heavy

equipment, and reducing the intensity and frequency of site treatments. Soil compaction, and

removal or disturbance of humus layers and coarse woody debris, may impact populations of

fungi and arthropods. These provisions are intended to apply throughout the matrix forests

and within the Adaptive Management Areas.

Provide for retention of old-growth fragments in watersheds where little remains.

The distribution of old-growth stands throughout the landscape is an important component

of ecosystem diversity, and plays a significant role in providing for biological and structural

diversity across the landscape. Isolated remnant old-growth patches are ecologically

significant in functioning as refugia for a host of old-growth associated species, particularly

those with limited dispersal capabilities that are not able to migrate across large landscapes

of younger stands. These include, but are not limited to, many species of fungi, lichens,

bryophytes, arthropods, and vascular plants, and will likely include vertebrate species such

as small mammals and amphibians, and various bird species. Isolated patches will function

as refugia where old-growth associated species are able to persist until conditions become

suitable for their dispersal into adjacent stands. Loss of these old-growth stands may result

in local extirpation of an array of species. It is prudent to retain what little remains of this

age class within landscape areas where it is currently very limited. This will ensure future

options for management and enhancement of the diversity within adjacent developing stands

Landscape areas where little late-successional forest persists should be managed to retain

late-successional patches. This standard and guideline will be applied in fifth field

watersheds (20 to 200 square miles) in which federal forest lands are currently comprised of

15 percent or less late-successional forest. This assessment should include all allocations in

the watershed. Within such an area, all remaining late-successional stands should be

protected. Protection of these stands could be modified in the future, when other portions of

the watershed have recovered to the point where they could replace the ecological roles of

these stands.
Standards and Guidelines C-45

In Adaptive Management Areas, less than 15 percent of federal forest land in fifth field

watershed in late-successional forest should be considered as a threshold for analysis rather

than a strict standard and guideline. A proposal to modify such stands should only be

implemented following an analysis that considers the ecological function of the remaining

late-successional forest and its location in the landscape. 

Known Northern Spotted Owl Activity Centers

Standards and guidelines in the Late-Successional Reserve portion of these standards and

guidelines specify the protection of 100-acres of owl habitat around all known owl activity

centers. Management of stands in the matrix surrounding these areas will be designed to

reduce risks of natural disturbance.

Current Plans and Draft Plan Preferred Alternatives

Except as specified in this paragraph or elsewhere in this section (and summarized under

exceptions listed on page C-3), other allocations and standards and guidelines of current

plans and draft plan preferred alternatives will be applied in the matrix where they provide

greater benefits to late-successional forest related species than the provisions of these

standards and guidelines. However, Administratively Withdrawn Areas that are specified in

the current plans and draft plan preferred alternatives to benefit American martens, pileated

woodpeckers, and other late-successional species are returned to the matrix unless local

knowledge indicates that other allocations and these standards and guidelines will not meet

management objectives for these species.

Protection Buffers

These standards and guidelines incorporated from the Scientific Analysis Team Report will

result in protection for specific species. The following rare and locally endemic species are

likely to be assured viability if they occur within designated areas. However, where these

species occur in the matrix, the following standards and guidelines will be applied. For the

birds listed below, activities that are implemented in 1994 should use this information to the

greatest degree possible. Activities implemented in 1995 and later must include these

provisions. For the Lynx, implementation should follow the schedule described for survey

and manage component 2 on page C-5 or these standards and guidelines.

Birds:

White-headed Woodpecker, Black-backed Woodpecker, Pygmy Nuthatch, and Flammulated

Owl - These species will not be sufficiently aided by application of mitigation measures for

riparian habitat protection or for marbled murrelets alone. They all occur on the periphery of

the range of the northern spotted owl on the east slope of the Cascade Range in Washington

or Oregon. Additionally, the white-headed woodpecker and flammulated owl occur in the

Klamath Province in northwestern California and southwestern Oregon. The viability of all 
Standards and Guidelines C-46

four species within the range of the northern spotted owl was rated as a medium risk on

National Forests, although they each are much more widely distributed elsewhere.

Apply the following mitigation standards and guidelines to ensure that the distribution and

numbers of all four species do not severely decline on National Forests and BLM Districts

within the range of the northern spotted owl. These guidelines apply to the forest matrix

outside designated habitat for the northern spotted owl and Riparian Reserves. Maintain

adequate numbers of large snags and green-tree replacements for future snags within the

four species’ ranges in appropriate forest types. Where feasible, green-tree replacements for

future snags can be left in groups to reduce blowdown. Specifically, the Scientific Analysis

Team recommends that no snags over 20 inches dbh be marked for cutting. The Scientific

Analysis Team recognizes, however, that safety considerations may prevent always retaining

all snags. Use of standardized definitions of hazard trees is required. For the longer term,

provide for sufficient numbers of green trees to provide for the full (100 percent) population

potential of each species.

As depicted by Neitro in Management of Wildlife and Fish Habitats in Forest of Western

Oregon and Washington (1985), the 100 percent population potential for white-headed

woodpeckers is 0.60 conifer snags (ponderosa pine of Douglas-fir) per acre in forest

habitats; these snags must be at least 15 inches dbh (or largest available if 15 inch dbh snags

are not available) and in soft decay stages, and must be provided in stands of ponderosa pine

and mixed pine/Douglas-fir. The 100 percent population potential for black-backed

woodpeckers is 0.12 conifer snags per acre in forest habitats; these snags must be at least 17

inches dbh (or largest available if 17 inch dbh snags are not available) and in hard decay

stages, and must be provided in stands of mixed conifer and lodgepole pine in higher

elevations of the Cascade Range. Provision of snags for other cavity-nesting species,

including primary cavity-nesters, must be added to the requirements for these two

woodpecker species. Site-specific analysis, and application of a snag recruitment model

(specifically, the Forest Service’s Snag Recruitment Simulator) taking into account tree

species, diameters, falling rates, and decay rates, will be required to determine appropriate

tree and snag species mixes and densities. If snag requirements cannot be met, then harvest

must not take place.

As identified by the expert panel, black-backed woodpeckers also require beetle infested

trees for foraging; some such trees should be provided in appropriate habitat, and sanitation

harvest of all such trees would be detrimental to the species. More information is needed on

habitat use, seasonal occurrence, and use of forest age classes and burns, for the

black-backed woodpecker.

Pygmy nuthatches use habitat very similar to those of white-headed woodpeckers. Pygmy

nuthatches require large trees, typically ponderosa pine within the range of the northern

spotted owl, for roosting. Provision of snags for white-headed woodpeckers is assumed to

provide for the needs of pygmy nuthatch, as no species-specific guidelines for the species

have been developed. Additional information on ecology of pygmy nuthatch within the range

of the northern spotted owl is needed to develop more precise standards and guidelines.

Flammulated owls are secondary cavity-nesters and use cavities, in snags and live trees, 
Standards and Guidelines C-47

created by woodpeckers or, less often, that occur naturally. It is assumed that standards and

guidelines for snags and green-tree replacements for woodpeckers and other primary

cavity-nesting species, as provided by existing National Forest and BLM District Land and

Resource Management Plans and for the woodpeckers in this species group, would provide

for flammulated owls.

Note: The snag recommendations above are based on the model presented by Neitro and

others (1985). In that model, snag requirements for individual species were treated as

additive in developing snag requirements for the overall community of cavity excavators. As

noted above, "provision of snags for other cavity-nesting species, including primary cavity

nesters, must be added to the requirements for these two woodpecker species" (black-backed

and white headed woodpeckers).

Snag requirements are developed by the National Forests and BLM Districts for specific

forest cover types, and these may be further broken down by geographic location. The intent

is to tailor the requirements to those species that are actually expected to occur in an area. To

determine if the protection buffer requirements should be added to existing Forest or BLM

District Plan requirements, the basis for those existing requirements should be analyzed to

determine if they include the species identified by SAT at the specified level of percent

population potential. If they do not, then the SAT requirements must be added to the existing

Forest and BLM District Plan requirements.

Mammals:

Lynx - Lynx are rare within the range of the northern spotted owl, occurring primarily in the

Okanogan area of Washington. The lynx is currently listed by the Fish and Wildlife Service

as a Category 2 candidate (a species for which additional information is needed to propose

listing as threatened or endangered). A petition was filed to list the lynx as endangered

within the northern Cascades of Washington, based on small population size, population

isolation, and lack of adequate prey base (snowshoe hare). However, the Fish and Wildlife

Service ruled that available information does not warrant listing the lynx in Washington.

Three primary habitat components for lynx are (1) foraging habitat (15 to 35 year old

lodgepole pine) to support snowshoe hare and provide hunting cover, (2) denning sites

(patches of greater than 200-year old spruce and fir, generally less than 5 acres), and (3)

dispersal/travel cover (variable in vegetation composition and structure). The major limiting

factor is abundance of snowshoe hare, which in turn is limited by availability of winter

habitat (primarily early-successional lodgepole pine with trees at least 6 feet tall). Past

excessive trapping of lynx and incidental mortality of lynx from hunting of other species

have depressed populations and may have been detrimental to local lynx populations in

Washington. Roads provide access to hunters and trappers and thus road density may be

related to lynx mortality.

The reserves and other designated areas in these standards and guidelines will provide

denning habitat within protected forest stands in juxtaposition with early-successional

vegetation in the forest matrix. Connectivity between many of the denning patches will be

provided by the network of buffers along streams under the Riparian Reserves.
Standards and Guidelines C-48

In addition, the Scientific Analysis Team proposed development of site-specific timber

harvest, roading, and fire management plans in known lynx range. These plans should be

developed in consultation with state wildlife agencies and should address: (1) minimizing

road construction, closing unused roads, and maintaining roads to the minimum standard

possible; (2) using prescribed fire to maintain forage for snowshoe hare in juxtaposition with

hunting cover; (3) designating areas as closed to kill trapping of any furbearer to avoid

incidental lynx mortality to maintain population refugia for lynx in key areas; (4) planning

for kill trapping closure on a wider basis if data indicate a declining lynx population as a

result of incidental trapping mortality; and (5) developing and implementing a credible

survey and monitoring strategy to determine the distribution of lynx throughout its potential

range.

Fire and Fuels Management

For areas in the matrix that are located in the rural interface, fire management activities

should be coordinated with local governments, agencies, and landowners during watershed

analysis to identify additional factors which may affect hazard reduction goals. Hazard

reduction may become more important in the rural interface and areas adjacent to structures,

dwellings or other amenities. Fire suppression actions in the matrix will have no additional

standards and guidelines.
Table C-3. Species to be protected through survey and management standards and

guidelines. Each of the four survey strategies is described in the text.

Survey Strategies

Species 1 2 3 4

Fungi

Mycorrhizal Fungi

Boletes 

Gastroboletus subalpinus x x

Gastroboletus turbinatus x

Boletes, low elevation 

Boletus piperatus x

Tylopilus pseudoscaber x x

Rare Boletes 

Boletus haematinus x x

Boletus pulcherrimus x x

Gastroboletus imbellus x x

Gastroboletus ruber x x

False Truffles 

Nivatogastrium nubigenum x x

Rhizopogon abietis x

Rhizopogon atroviolaceus x

Rhizopogon truncatus x

Thaxterogaster pingue x

Uncommon False Truffle

Macowanites chlorinosmus x x

Rare False Truffles 

Alpova alexsmithii x x

Alpova olivaceotinctus x x

Arcangeliella crassa x x

Arcangeliella lactarioides x x

Destuntzia fusca x x

Destuntzia rubra x x

Gautieria magnicellaris x x

Gautieria otthii x x

Leucogaster citrinus x x

Leucogaster microsporus x x

Macowanites lymanensis x x

Macowanites mollis x x

Martellia fragrans x x

Martellia idahoensis x x

Martellia monticola x x

Survey Strategies: 1 = manage known sites; 2 = survey prior to activities and manage

3 = conduct extensive surveys and manage sites; 4 = conduct general regional surveys

Standards and Guidelines C-49
Table C-3. (continued)

Survey Strategies

Species 1 2 3 4

Rare False Truffles (continued)

Octavianina macrospora x x

Octavianina papyracea x x

Rhizopogon brunneiniger x x

Rhizopogon evadens var. subalpinus x x

Rhizopogon exiguus x x

Rhizopogon flavofibrillosus x x

Rhizopogon inquinatus x x

Sedecula pulvinata x x

Undescribed Taxa, Rare Truffles & False truffles 

Alpova sp. nov. #Trappe 9730 x x

Alpova sp. nov. #Trappe 1966 x x

Arcangeliella sp. nov. #Trappe 12382 x x

Arcangeliella sp. nov. #Trappe 12359 x x

Chamonixia pacifica sp. nov. #Trappe 12768 x x

Elasomyces sp. nov. #Trappe 1038 x x

Gastroboletus sp. nov. #Trappe 2897 x x

Gastroboletus sp. nov. #Trappe 7515 x x

Gastrosuillus sp. nov. #Trappe 7516 x x

Gastrosuillus sp. nov. #Trappe 9608 x x

Gymnomyces sp. nov. #Trappe 4703, 5576 x x

Gymnomyces sp. nov. #Trappe 5052 x x

Gymnomyces sp. nov. #Trappe 1690,1706,1710 x x

Gymnomyces sp. nov. #Trappe 7545 x x

Hydnotrya sp. nov. #Trappe 787, 792 x x

Hydnotrya subnix sp. nov. #Trappe 1861 x x

Martellia sp. nov. #Trappe 649 x x

Martellia sp. nov. #Trappe 1700 x x

Martellia sp. nov. #Trappe 311 x x

Martellia sp. nov. #Trappe 5903 x x

Octavianina sp. nov. #Trappe 7502 x x

Rhizopogon sp. nov. #Trappe 9432 x x

Rhizopogon sp. nov. #Trappe 1692 x x

Rhizopogon sp. nov. #Trappe 1698 x x

Thaxterogaster sp. nov. #Trappe x x

Tuber sp. nov. #Trappe 2302 x x

Tuber sp. nov. #Trappe 12493 x x

Rare Truffles 

Balsamia nigra x x

Choiromyces alveolatus x x

Choiromyces venosus x x

Survey Strategies: 1 = manage known sites; 2 = survey prior to activities and manage

3 = conduct extensive surveys and manage sites; 4 = conduct general regional surveys

Standards and Guidelines C-50
Table C-3. (continued)

Survey Strategies

Species 1 2 3 4

Rare Truffles (continued)

Elaphomyces anthracinus x x

Elaphomyces subviscidus x x

Chanterelles 

Cantharellus cibarius x x

Cantharellus subalbidus x x

Cantharellus tubaeformis x x

Chanterelles - Gomphus 

Gomphus bonarii x

Gomphus clavatus x

Gomphus floccosus x

Gomphus kauffmanii x

Rare Chanterelle 

Cantharellus formosus x x

Polyozellus multiplex x x

Uncommon Coral Fungi 

Ramaria abietina x

Ramaria araiospora x x

Ramaria botryis var. aurantiiramosa x x

Ramaria concolor f. tsugina x

Ramaria coulterae x

Ramaria fasciculata var. sparsiramosa x x

Ramaria gelatiniaurantia x x

Ramaria largentii x x

Ramaria rubella var. blanda x x

Ramaria rubrievanescens x x

Ramaria rubripermanens x x

Ramaria suecica x

Ramaria thiersii x x

Rare Coral Fungi 

Ramaria amyloidea x x

Ramaria aurantiisiccescens x x

Ramaria celerivirescens x x

Ramaria claviramulata x x

Ramaria concolor f. marri x x

Ramaria cyaneigranosa x x

Ramaria hilaris var. olympiana x x

Ramaria lorithamnus x x

Survey Strategies: 1 = manage known sites; 2 = survey prior to activities and manage

3 = conduct extensive surveys and manage sites; 4 = conduct general regional surveys

Standards and Guidelines C-51
Table C-3. (continued)

Survey Strategies

Species 1 2 3 4

Rare Coral Fungi (continued)

Ramaria maculatipes x x

Ramaria rainierensis x x

Ramaria rubribrunnescens x x

Ramaria stuntzii x x

Ramaria verlotensis x x

Ramaria gracilis x x

Ramaria spinulosa x x

Phaeocollybia 

Phaeocollybia attenuata x

Phaeocollybia californica x x

Phaeocollybia carmanahensis x x

Phaeocollybia dissiliens x x

Phaeocollybia fallax x

Phaeocollybia gregaria x x

Phaeocollybia kauffmanii x x

Phaeocollybia olivacea x

Phaeocollybia oregonensis x x

Phaeocollybia piceae x x

Phaeocollybia pseudofestiva x

Phaeocollybia scatesiae x x

Phaeocollybia sipei x x

Phaeocollybia spadicea x

Uncommon Gilled Mushrooms 

Catathelasma ventricosa x

Cortinarius azureus x

Cortinarius boulderensis x x

Cortinarius cyanites x

Cortinarius magnivelatus x x

Cortinarius olympianus x x

Cortinarius spilomius x

Cortinarius tabularis x

Cortinarius valgus x

Dermocybe humboldtensis x x

Hebeloma olympiana x x

Hygrophorus caeruleus x x

Hygrophorus karstenii x

Hygrophorus vernalis x x

Russula mustelina x

Survey Strategies: 1 = manage known sites; 2 = survey prior to activities and manage

3 = conduct extensive surveys and manage sites; 4 = conduct general regional surveys

Standards and Guidelines C-52
Table C-3. (continued)

Survey Strategies

Species 1 2 3 4

Rare Gilled Mushrooms 

Chroogomphus loculatus x x

Cortinarius canabarba x x

Cortinarius rainierensis x x

Cortinarius variipes x x

Cortinarius verrucisporus x x

Cortinarius wiebeae x x

Tricholoma venenatum x x

Uncommon Ecto-Polypores 

Albatrellus ellisii x

Albatrellus flettii x

Rare Ecto-Polypores 

Albatrellus avellaneus x x

Albatrellus caeruleoporus x x

Tooth Fungi 

Hydnum repandum x

Hydnum umbilicatum x

Phellodon atratum x

Sarcodon fuscoindicum x

Sarcodon imbricatus x

Rare Zygomycetes 

Endogone acrogena x x

Endogone oregonensis x x

Glomus radiatum x x

Saprobes (Decomposers)

Uncommon Gilled Mushrooms 

Baeospora myriadophylla x

Chrysomphalina grossula x

Collybia bakerensis x x

Fayodia gracilipes (rainierensis) x

Gymnopilus puntifolius x x

Marasmius applanatipes x x

Mycena hudsoniana x x

Mycena lilacifolia x

Mycena marginella x

Mycena monticola x x

Mycena overholtsii x x

Survey Strategies: 1 = manage known sites; 2 = survey prior to activities and manage

3 = conduct extensive surveys and manage sites; 4 = conduct general regional surveys

Standards and Guidelines C-53
Table C-3. (continued)

Survey Strategies

Species 1 2 3 4

Uncommon Gilled Mushrooms (continued)

Mycena quinaultensis x x

Mycena tenax x

Mythicomyces corneipes x

Neolentinus kauffmanii x x

Pholiota albivelata x x

Stagnicola perplexa x

Rare Gilled Mushrooms 

Clitocybe subditopoda x x

Clitocybe senilis x x

Neolentinus adherens x x

Rhodocybe nitida x x

Rhodocybe speciosa x x

Tricholomopsis fulvescens x x

Noble Polypore (rare and endangered)

Oxyporus nobilissimus x x x

Bondarzewia Polypore

Bondarzewia montana x x x

Rare Resupinates and Polypores 

Aleurodiscus farlowii x x

Dichostereum granulosum x x

Cudonia monticola x

Gyromitra californica x x

Gyromitra esculenta x x

Gyromitra infula x x

Gyromitra melaleucoides x x

Gyromitra montana (syn. G. gigas) x x

Otidea leporina x

Otidea onotica x

Otidea smithii x x

Plectania melastoma x

Podostroma alutaceum x

Sarcosoma mexicana x

Sarcosphaera eximia x

Spathularia flavida x

Rare Cup Fungi 

Aleuria rhenana

Bryoglossum gracile

Survey Strategies: 1 = manage known sites; 2 = survey prior to activities and manage

3 = conduct extensive surveys and manage sites; 4 = conduct general regional surveys

Standards and Guidelines C-54
Table C-3. (continued)

Survey Strategies

Species 1 2 3 4

Rare Cup Fungi (continued) x x

Gelatinodiscus flavidus

Helvella compressa x x

Helvella crassitunicata x x

Helvella elastica x x

Helvella maculata x x

Neournula pouchetii x x

Pithya vulgaris x x

Plectania latahensis x x

Plectania milleri x x

Pseudaleuria quinaultiana x x

Club Coral Fungi 

Clavariadelphus ligula x x

Clavariadelphus pistilaris x x

Clavariadelphus truncatus x x

Clavariadelphus borealis x x

Clavariadelphus lovejoyae x x

Clavariadelphus sachalinensis x x

Clavariadelphus subfastigiatus x x

Jelly Mushroom

Phlogoitis helvelloides x x

Branched Coral Fungi 

Clavulina cinerea x x

Clavulina cristata x x

Clavulina ornatipes x x

Mushroom Lichen 

Phytoconis ericetorum x x

Parasitic Fungi 

Asterophora lycoperdoides x

Asterophora parasitica x

Collybia racemosa x

Cordyceps capitata x

Cordyceps ophioglossoides x

Hypomyces luteovirens x

Cauliflower Mushroom

Sparassis crispa x

Survey Strategies: 1 = manage known sites; 2 = survey prior to activities and manage

3 = conduct extensive surveys and manage sites; 4 = conduct general regional surveys

Standards and Guidelines C-55
Table C-3. (continued)

Survey Strategies

Species 1 2 3 4

Moss Dwelling Mushrooms 

Cyphellostereum laeve x

Galerina atkinsoniana x

Galerina cerina x

Galerina heterocystis x

Galerina sphagnicola x

Galerina vittaeformis x

Rickenella setipes x

Coral Fungi

Clavicorona avellanea x

Lichens

Rare Forage Lichen

Bryoria tortuosa x x

Rare Leafy (arboreal) Lichens

Hypogymnia duplicata x x x

Tholurna dissimilis x x

Rare Nitrogen-fixing Lichens 

Dendriscocaulon intricatulum x x

Lobaria hallii x x

Lobaria linita x x x

Nephroma occultum x x

Pannaria rubiginosa x x

Pseudocyphellaria rainierensis x x x

Nitrogen-fixing Lichens 

Lobaria oregana x

Lobaria pulmonaria x

Lobaria scrobiculata x

Nephroma bellum x

Nephroma helveticum x

Nephroma laevigatum x

Nephroma parile x

Nephroma resupinatum x

Pannaria leucostictoides x

Pannaria mediterranea x

Pannaria saubinetii x

Survey Strategies: 1 = manage known sites; 2 = survey prior to activities and manage

3 = conduct extensive surveys and manage sites; 4 = conduct general regional surveys

Standards and Guidelines C-56
Table C-3. (continued)

Survey Strategies

Species 1 2 3 4

Nitrogen-fixing Lichens (continued)

Peltigera collina x

Peltigera neckeri x

Peltigera pacifica x

Pseudocyphellaria anomala x

Pseudocyphellaria anthraspis x

Pseudocyphellaria crocata x

Sticta beauvoisii x

Sticta fuliginosa x

Sticta limbata x

Pin Lichens 

Calicium abietinum x

Calicium adaequatum x

Calicium adspersum x

Calicium glaucellum x

Calicium viride x

Chaenotheca brunneola x

Chaenotheca chrysocephala x

Chaenotheca ferruginea x

Chaenotheca furfuracea x

Chaenotheca subroscida x

Chaenothecopis pusilla x

Cyphelium inquinans x

Microcalicium arenarium x

Mycocalicium subtile x

Stenocybe clavata x

Stenocybe major x

Rare Rock Lichens 

Pilophorus nigricaulis x x

Sticta arctica x x

Riparian Lichens 

Cetrelia cetrarioides x

Collema nigrescens x

Leptogium burnetiae var. hirsutum x

Leptogium cyanescens x

Leptogium saturninum x

Leptogium teretiusculum x

Platismatia lacunosa x

Ramalina thrausta x

Usnea longissima x

Survey Strategies: 1 = manage known sites; 2 = survey prior to activities and manage

3 = conduct extensive surveys and manage sites; 4 = conduct general regional surveys

Standards and Guidelines C-57
Table C-3. (continued)

Survey Strategies

Species 1 2 3 4

Aquatic Lichens 

Dermatocarpon luridum x x

Hydrothyria venosa x x

Leptogium rivale x x

Rare Oceanic Influenced Lichens 

Bryoria pseudocapillaris x x

Bryoria spiralifera x x

Bryoria subcana x x

Buellia oidalea x x

Erioderma sorediatum x x

Hypogymnia oceanica x x

Leioderma sorediatum x x

Leptogium brebissonii x x

Niebla cephalota x x

Pseudocyphellaria mougeotiana x x

Teloschistes flavicans x x

Usnea hesperina x x

Oceanic Influenced Lichens

Cetraria californica x x

Heterodermia leucomelos x x

Loxospora sp. nov. "corallifera" (Brodo in edit) x x

Pyrrhospora quernea x x

Additional Lichen Species

Cladonia norvegica x

Heterodermia sitchensis x

Hygomnia vittiata x

Hypotrachyna revoluta x

Ramalina pollinaria x

Nephroma isidiosum x

Bryophytes

Antitrichia curtipendula x

Bartramiopsis lescurii x x

Brotherella roelli x x

Diplophyllu albicans x x

Diplophyllum plicatum x x

Douinia ovata x

Encalypta brevicolla var. crumiana x x

Herbertus aduncus x x

Herbertus sakurali x x

Survey Strategies: 1 = manage known sites; 2 = survey prior to activities and manage

3 = conduct extensive surveys and manage sites; 4 = conduct general regional surveys

Standards and Guidelines C-58
Table C-3. (continued)

Survey Strategies

Species 1 2 3 4

Bryophytes (continued)

Iwatsuklella leucotricha x x

Kurzia makinoana x x

Marsupella emarginata var. aquatica x x

Orthodontlum gracile x x

Plagiochila satol x x

Plagiochila semidecurrens x x

Pleuroziopsis ruthenica x x

Ptilidium californicum x x

Racomitrium aquaticum x x

Radula brunnea x x

Scouleria marginata x

Tetraphis geniculata x x

Tritomaria exsectiformis x x

Tritomaria quinquedentata x x

Amphibians

Del Norte salamander x

Larch Mountain salamander x

Shasta salamander x x

Siskiyou Mountains salamander x x

Van Dyke's salamander (Cascades) x

Mammals

Red tree vole (P. longicaudus) x

Mollusks

Cryptomastix devia x x

Cryptomastix hendersoni x x

Helminthoglypta hertleini x x

Helminthoglypta talmadgei x x

Megomphix hemphilli x x

Monadenia chaceana x x

Monadenia churchi x x

Monadenia fidelis minor x x

Monadenia troglodytes troglodytes x x

Monadenia troglodytes wintu x x

Oreohelix n. sp. x x

Pristiloma articum crateris x x

Trilobopsis roperi x x

Trilobopsis tehamana x x

Vertigo n. sp. x x

Survey Strategies: 1 = manage known sites; 2 = survey prior to activities and manage

3 = conduct extensive surveys and manage sites; 4 = conduct general regional surveys

Standards and Guidelines C-59
Table C-3. (continued)

Survey Strategies

Species 1 2 3 4

Mollusks (continued)

Vespericola pressleyi x x

Vespericola shasta x x

Deroceras hesperium x x

Hemphillia barringtoni x x

Hemphillia glandulosa x x

Hemphillia malonei x x

Hemphillia pantherina x x

Prophysaon coeruleum x x

Prophysaon dubium x x

Fluminicola n. sp. 1 x x

Fluminicola n. sp. 11 x x

Fluminicola n. sp. 14 x x

Fluminicola n. sp. 15 x x

Fluminicola n. sp. 16 x x

Fluminicola n. sp. 17 x x

Fluminicola n. sp. 18 x x

Fluminicola n. sp. 19 x x

Fluminicola n. sp. 2 x x

Fluminicola n. sp. 20 x x

Fluminicola n. sp. 3 x x

Fluminicola seminalis x x

Juga (O.) n. sp. 2 x x

Juga (O.) n. sp. 3 x x

Lyogyrus n. sp. 1 x x

Lyogyrus n. sp. 2 x x

Lyogyrus n. sp. 3 x x

Vorticifex klamathensis sinitsini x x

Vorticifex n. sp. 1 x x

Vascular Plants

Allotropa virgata x x

Arceuthobium tsugense x x

Aster vialis x x

Bensoniella oregana (California) x x

Botrychium minganense x x

Botrychium montanum x x

Clintonia andrewsiana x x

Coptis asplenifolia x x

Survey Strategies: 1 = manage known sites; 2 = survey prior to activities and manage

3 = conduct extensive surveys and manage sites; 4 = conduct general regional surveys

Standards and Guidelines C-60
Table C-3. (continued)

Survey Strategies

Species 1 2 3 4

Vascular Plants (continued)

Coptis trifolia x x

Corydalis aquae-gelidae x x

Cypripedium fasciculatum (Klamath) x x

Cypripedium montanum (west Cascades) x x

Galium kamtschaticum x x

Habenaria orbiculata x x

Pedicularis howellii x x

Pedicularis howellii x x

Scoliopus biglovei x x

Arthropods

Canopy herbivores (south range) x

Coarse wood chewers (south range) x

Litter and soil dwelling species (south range) x

Understory and forest gap herbivores x

Survey Strategies: 1 = manage known sites; 2 = survey prior to activities and manage

3 = conduct extensive surveys and manage sites; 4 = conduct general regional surveys

Standards and Guidelines C-61
Adaptive Management Areas D-1

D. Adaptive Management Areas

Acres

Key and non-Key Watersheds are specified for all areas, and therefore overlay all other land

allocations. For the portion of Adaptive Management Areas located within Key Watersheds,

standards and guidelines for Key Watersheds, as well as standards and guidelines for

Adaptive Management Areas, apply, with some flexibility as described below (see additional

detail under Hierarchy of Standards and Guidelines Within Adaptive Management Areas

later in this section). 

Adaptive Management Areas within Tier 1 Key Watersheds ............. 228,100

Adaptive Management Areas within Tier 2 Key Watersheds .............. 60,600

Adaptive Management Areas within non-Key (other) Watersheds ....... 1,233,100

Total Adaptive Management Areas ................................ 1,521,800

Acreage of Riparian Reserves is not calculated within Adaptive Management Areas for these

standards and guidelines. However, Riparian Reserve standards and guidelines affect

approximately 40 percent of Adaptive Management Areas. The above acres are net federal,

not including Congressionally Reserved Areas or Late-Successional Reserves. Acreage for

each Adaptive Management Area listed later in this section includes all ownerships and all

land allocations within the Adaptive Management Area boundary.

Introduction

Adaptive Management Areas are landscape units designated to encourage the development

and testing of technical and social approaches to achieving desired ecological, economic, and

other social objectives. Ten areas ranging from about 92,000 to nearly 500,000 acres of

federal lands have been identified. The areas are well distributed in the physiographic

provinces. Most are associated with subregions impacted socially and economically by

reduced timber harvest from the federal lands. The areas provide a diversity of biological

challenges, intermixed land ownerships, natural resource objectives, and social contexts. In

the Applegate Adaptive Management Area in Oregon, grassroots community-based

activities have already begun. 

The overall objective for Adaptive Management Areas is to learn how to manage on an

ecosystem basis in terms of both technical and social challenges, and in a manner consistent

with applicable laws. It is hoped that localized, idiosyncratic approaches that may achieve

the conservation objectives of these standards and guidelines can be pursued. These

approaches rely on the experience and ingenuity of resource managers and communities

rather than traditionally derived and tightly prescriptive approaches that are generally

applied in management of forests. 
Adaptive Management Areas D-2

The Adaptive Management Areas are intended to contribute substantially to the achievement

of objectives for these standards and guidelines. This includes provision of well-distributed

late-successional habitat outside of reserves, retention of key structural elements of latesuccessional forests on lands subjected to regeneration harvest, and restoration and

protection of riparian zones as well as provision of a stable timber supply.

The Adaptive Management Area concept incorporates the three adaptive management

models/objectives discussed in the FEMAT Report--technical, administrative, and

cultural/social. 

Key features of the Adaptive Management Areas:

The areas are well-distributed geographically, represent a mix of technical and social

challenges and are of sufficient size to provide for landscape-level management

approaches. 

The areas provide for development and demonstration of monitoring protocols and new

approaches to land management that integrate economic and ecological objectives based

on credible development programs and watershed and landscape analysis.

Opportunities exist for education, including technical training, to qualify local

community residents for employment in monitoring and other management programs.

Innovation in community involvement is encouraged, including approaches to

implementation of initial management strategies and perhaps, over the longer term,

development of new forest policies.

Innovation is expected in developing adequate and stable funding sources for

monitoring, research, retraining, restoration and other activities.

Innovation in integration of multi-ownership watersheds is encouraged among federal

agencies and is likewise encouraged among state and federal agencies, and private

landowners.

Innovation in agency organization and personnel policies might include individual

certification requirements, and modification of recruitment and promotion procedures to

encourage local longevity among the federal workforce.

Selection of the Adaptive Management Areas

Adaptive Management Areas were selected to provide opportunities for innovation, to

provide examples in major physiographic provinces, and to provide a range of technical

challenges, from an emphasis on restoration of late-successional forest conditions and

riparian zones to integration of commercial timber harvest with ecological objectives.

The Adaptive Management Areas have been geographically located to minimize risk to 
Adaptive Management Areas D-3

achieving the conservation objectives of these standards and guidelines. The designation of

Adaptive Management Areas was intended to provide a mixture of public and private lands.

In locating the Adaptive Management Areas, the proximity of communities that were subject

to adverse economic impacts resulting from reduced federal timber harvest was considered.

The social and economic analysis of the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team

was a major source of information that helped guide these decisions.

The Adaptive Management Areas incorporate a mix of ownerships and administrative

responsibilities. Six areas include lands administered by the Forest Service and BLM. In two

areas (Northern Coast Range and Olympic) there are significant opportunities for the states

to participate in a major cooperative adaptive management effort. The majority of areas also

have interspersed privately owned forest lands that could be incorporated into an overall

plan if landowners so desired.

Establishment of the Adaptive Management Areas is not intended to discourage the

development of innovative social and technical approaches to forest resource issues in other

locales. They are intended to provide a geographic focus for innovation and experimentation

with the intent that such experience will be widely shared. The array of areas provides a

balance between having a system of areas that is: (1) so large and diffuse that it lacks focus

and adequate resources; and has extensive management constraints because of its size and

overall impact on regional conservation strategies; and (2) too small to allow for meaningful

ecological and social experimentation.

Technical Objectives

The Adaptive Management Areas have scientific and technical innovation and

experimentation as objectives. The guiding principle is to allow freedom in forest

management approaches to encourage innovation in achieving the goals of these standards

and guidelines. This challenge includes active involvement by the land management and

regulatory agencies early in the planning process.

The primary technical objectives of the Adaptive Management Areas are development,

demonstration, implementation, and evaluation of monitoring programs and innovative

management practices that integrate ecological and economic values. Experiments, including

some of large scale, are likely. Demonstrations and pilot projects alone, while perhaps

significant, useful, and encouraged in some circumstances, may not be sufficient to achieve

the objectives. 

Monitoring is essential to the success of any plan and to an adaptive management program.

Hence, development and demonstration of monitoring and training of the workforce are

technical challenges and should be emphasized.

Technical topics requiring demonstration or investigation are a priority for Adaptive

Management Areas and cover a wide spectrum, from the welfare of organisms to ecosystems

to landscapes. Included are development, demonstration, and testing of techniques for:
Adaptive Management Areas D-4

Creation and maintenance of a variety of forest structural conditions including latesuccessional forest conditions and desired riparian habitat conditions.

Integration of timber production with maintenance or restoration of fisheries habitat and

water quality.

Restoration of structural complexity and biological diversity in forests and streams that

have been degraded by past management activities and natural events.

Integration of the habitat needs of wildlife (particularly of sensitive and threatened

species) with timber management. 

Development of logging and transportation systems with low impact on soil stability and

water quality.

Design and testing of effects of forest management activities at the landscape level.

Restoration and maintenance of forest health using controlled fire and silvicultural

approaches.

Each Adaptive Management Area will have an interdisciplinary technical advisory panel,

including specialists from outside government agencies, that will provide advice and support

to managers and local communities involved with this effort.

Social Objectives

The primary social objective of Adaptive Management Areas is the provision of flexible

experimentation with policies and management. These areas should provide opportunities

for land managing and regulatory agencies, other government entities, nongovernmental

organizations, local groups, landowners, communities, and citizens to work together to

develop innovative management approaches. Broadly, Adaptive Management Areas are

intended to be prototypes of how forest communities might be sustained. 

Innovative approaches include social learning and adaptation, which depend upon local

communities having sufficient political capacity, economic resources, and technical expertise

to be full participants in ecosystem management. Similarly, management will need to be

coordinated and characterized by collaboration across political jurisdictions and diverse

ownerships. This will require mediating across interests and disciplines, strengthening local

political capability, and enhancing access to technical expertise. Adaptive management is, by

definition, information dependent. Setting objectives, developing management guidelines,

educating and training a workforce, organizing interactive planning and management

institutions, and monitoring accomplishments all require reliable, current inventories. New

information technologies can be used to provide such information. Local people might be

ideally suited to this task if appropriately trained.
Adaptive Management Areas D-5

Agency Approaches and Management Review

Federal agencies are expected to use Adaptive Management Areas to explore alternative

ways of doing business internally, and with each other, other organizations, local and state

government, and private landowners. In effect, the areas should be used to "learn to manage"

as well as to "manage to learn."

Agencies are expected to develop plans (jointly, where multiple agencies are involved) for

the Adaptive Management Areas. Development of a broad plan that identifies general

objectives and roles, and provides flexibility should be the goal. Such a plan could be used in

competing for financial resources, garnering political support, providing a shared vision, and

identifying experiences to be tracked.

If the Adaptive Management Areas are to make timely contributions to the objectives of

these standards and guidelines, and to the communities, it is absolutely critical that initiation

of activities not be delayed by requirements for comprehensive plans or consensus

documents beyond those required to meet existing legal requirements for activities.

Development of such documents can proceed simultaneously with other activities; the only

area in which detailed planning must precede most activities is the Snoqualmie Pass

Adaptive Management Area. Current plans and draft plan preferred alternatives, as modified

by the direction established in these standards and guidelines, can provide the starting point

for activities. Initial involvement of user groups and communities would emphasize how the

strategy and plans should be implemented. In the Snoqualmie Pass Adaptive Management

Area, minor activities such as those Categorically Excluded under NEPA (except timber

sales) and watershed restoration projects may precede detailed planning. 

Initial direction and continuing review should be provided by the Regional Interagency

Executive Committee. It is important that the interagency coordination involve both the

regulatory and management agencies, and that the regulatory agencies participate in planning

and regular review processes.

Adaptive Management Area Implementation Guidelines

Role of Agencies - The agencies will facilitate collaborative efforts, partnerships, mutual

learning and innovation. They will provide staff work to the process of managing the

Adaptive Management Areas. This could include providing meeting places, meeting

facilitation, and expert analysis. Agency scientists are expected to provide scientific design

of monitoring and experiments, though the decision is reserved for the federal land manager.

Although the agencies have a facilitation role, the land management agencies retain the

authority and responsibility to make decisions and the regulatory agencies retain the

authority and responsibility to regulate. Nothing in these guidelines is intended to change

those authorities or responsibilities.

Local Communities - Specific community roles with public agencies and subject matter

experts (such as the technical advisory panels) will include helping find innovative ways to

set objectives, develop plans, implement projects, and monitor accomplishments. For

example, Subtitle G of the 1990 Farm Bill gives criteria to identify "natural resource

dependent communities" which may be used if appropriate when identifying local 
Adaptive Management Areas D-6

communities.

Participation in Adaptive Management Areas - Although the emphasis is on the

participation of people who are actively involved with that geographic location, nothing in

these guidelines should be construed to suggest that the interests of people living outside

"local communities" should not be considered in making agency decisions. Participation will

be self identifying, to the extent possible. Experiments to address how this might happen are

encouraged.

Project Development and Implementation - Specific project planning must:

* Involve the public early

* Coordinate with overall activities within the province

* Begin some projects as soon as practicable to respond to and facilitate public interest

and involvement

* Begin some projects prior to completing an entire watershed analysis

* Begin watershed analysis as soon as possible

* Develop early plans and projects with the best available information

* Identify needs for improved inventory

* Proceed simultaneously with activities and Adaptive Management Area planning

* Assign priority status to watershed restoration projects that can be completed quickly 

* Begin projects in nonsensitive sections of the Adaptive Management Area

Area Assessment - The Adaptive Management Area plans need to be based on information

about historical, current and desired future conditions of the biophysical, social, and

economic aspects of the area. The plans will rely largely on existing information. The area

assessment will be a concise working document. The following is provided as a suggested

framework:

Biophysical: Consider disturbance history, terrestrial and aquatic conditions, sensitive

plant and animal species and/or habitat, capability of the system to produce a variety of

forest products. A description of the desired future condition or a range of acceptable

conditions for the biophysical system is needed. For example, what functions are

important to maintain at the landscape level? What structure, species, age classes,

and/or arrangement will maintain those functions? Consider both coarse and fine detail

over time. What does the community want the Adaptive Management Area to be like in

the future? What actions are needed to create that desired future condition?

Social: Consider historical and extant communities, their use patterns, uses of the land,

issues, resources, and opportunities. In some areas, other demographic data will be

helpful as well. What networks for communications are at work? How can the agencies

better interact with these? What collaborative process will work best for the

communities of interest to effectively participate in managing the Adaptive Management

Area? What does the community want to look like in the future? Desired future social

condition can be considered in terms of composition, structure, and/or functions over

time.

Economic: A description of current economic conditions might include an inventory of 
Adaptive Management Areas D-7

local employment, resource workers, skills, and access to technology. Desired future

conditions could describe the future employment opportunities (e.g., what forest work

will be needed in the future?) and skills needed to seize those opportunities. As the

desired future condition of the ecosystem is better understood, the future forest work will

also be more clear. Identification of needed knowledge, skills, abilities, and technology

for the future may be useful in developing training programs as well as business or

marketing assistance.

Plans - All Adaptive Management Areas will have a plan. An individual public, interagency

approach to planning will be developed for each Adaptive Management Area. The plan

should address or provide:

* A shared vision of the Adaptive Management Area, (e.g., the kind of knowledge the 

participants hope to gain). Identification of the desired future conditions may be 

developed in collaboration with communities, depending on the area. 

* Learning that includes social and political knowledge, not just biological and physical

information.

* A strategy to guide implementation, restoration, monitoring and experimental 

activities.

* A short-term (3 to 5 year) timber sale plan and long-term yield projections.

* Education of participants.

* A list of communities influenced by the Adaptive Management Area projects and 

outputs.

* An inventory of community strategies, and resources and partners being used.

* Coordination with overall activities within the province.

* A funding strategy.

* Integration of the community strategies and technical objectives.

Monitoring and Research - The Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (included in Section E of

this plan) and watershed analysis present the framework and some required actions for each

Adaptive Management Area. Additional efforts and specificity may be developed for each

Adaptive Management Area.

The learning opportunity provided by Adaptive Management Areas will be enhanced if clear,

measurable goals and objectives are set, monitored, and conveyed into the planning of

projects or into the appropriate component of the Adaptive Management Area plan or Forest

or District Plan. Shared synthesis of monitoring results will help provide a multipleperspective assessment on whether social and ecosystem goals are being met, help identify

problems to avoid in subsequent projects, and help gain consensus on what data gaps exist

and what changes to the monitoring and research programs are needed.

Review - Monitoring and research, with careful experimental design, will be conducted in

Adaptive Management Areas. Research in forest ecology and management as well as social,

biological, and earth sciences may be conducted. Each Adaptive Management Area will have

an interdisciplinary technical advisory panel that will provide advice to managers and the

local communities involved with this effort. The technical advisory panels will provide

advice and information on the appropriateness of the project.
Adaptive Management Areas D-8

Direction and review are provided by the Regional Interagency Executive Committee,

through the Regional Ecosystem Office. This review will help assure that plans and projects

developed for the various Adaptive Management Areas will be both scientifically and

ecologically credible. It will assure that new, innovative approaches are used, that the laws

and the goals of the plan are met, and that validation monitoring is incorporated.

The Regional Ecosystem Office will facilitate and coordinate the implementation of the

Adaptive Management Area program. Federal agencies are expected to use the Adaptive

Management Areas to explore new ways of working internally and externally.

Legal - All activities must comply with existing laws such as Endangered Species Act,

National Environmental Policy Act, National Forest Management Act, Forest Land Policy

and Management Act, Federal Advisory Committee Act, National Historic Preservation Act,

Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, and treaty rights. Management and regulatory agencies

should work together to determine ways to expedite management while ensuring compliance,

to improve cooperation through planning and on-the-ground consultation, and to avoid

confrontation.

Other Issues - Some issues are beyond the authority of the agencies or the Regional

Interagency Executive Committee. These include:

* Use of receipts from timber sales and other products derived from Adaptive 

Management Areas to develop programs and projects within the areas

* Employment targets for local people for special jobs like planning, training, and 

monitoring

* Special land management or stewardship contracts

* Restricted local use of wood and other products derived from Adaptive Management 

Areas.

Fire and Fuels Management

In Adaptive Management Areas, fire managers are encouraged to actively explore and

support opportunities to research the role and effects of fire management on ecosystem

functions. Cooperation across agency and ownership boundaries should be emphasized. The

standards and guidelines in current plans and draft plan preferred alternatives for hazard

reduction should be followed until approved Adaptive Management Area plans are

established. Fire management experts will participate on the local Interdisciplinary Technical

Advisory Panel on all Adaptive Management Areas. Management of Adaptive Management

Areas is intended to be innovative and experimental. Wildfire suppression actions, however,

should use accepted strategies and tactics, and conform with specific agency policy.

Timber Supply

One reason for locating Adaptive Management Areas adjacent to communities experiencing

adverse economic impacts is to provide opportunity for social and economic benefits to these

areas. Adaptive Management Areas are expected to produce timber as part of their program 
Adaptive Management Areas D-9

of activities consistent with their specific direction under these standards and guidelines. The

rates and methods of harvest will be determined on an area-by-area basis. Each area

management team is expected to develop a strategy for ecosystem management as part of the

Adaptive Management Area plan to guide implementation, restoration, monitoring, and

experimental activities involving timber sales. The strategy should contain a short-term (3 to

5 year) timber sale component and an assessment of long-term outputs of timber.

Education

Each Adaptive Management Area was located adjacent to one or more communities with

economies and culture long associated with utilization of forest resources. As a result, the

people have a "sense of place" and desire for involvement. Many of these local workers

already possess timber/forest-related skills and knowledge, as well as that sense of place,

which in combination make them natural participants in ecosystem-based management and

monitoring. Here adaptive management can bring indigenous knowledge together with

formal studies, the local communities and the land management agencies in a mix that may

provide creative common-sense approaches to complicated problems. 

Technical and scientific training of a local workforce should be an educational priority of the

Adaptive Management Area Program. Formal schooling and field apprenticeship might

provide the workforce needed to help implement ecosystem management, particularly in the

area of monitoring. This program might be based on collaborations among local community

colleges, state universities, and the agencies.

Standards and Guidelines

Also see Standards and Guidelines Common to all Land Allocations starting on page C-2 of

these standards and guidelines, and other standards and guidelines elsewhere in this section.

Late-Successional Reserves within Adaptive Management Areas will be managed according

to the standards and guidelines for such reserves except as provided elsewhere in this

section. Management of these areas will comply with the standards and guidelines for LateSuccessional Reserves, and management around these areas will be designed to reduce risk

of natural disturbances. Unmapped Late-Successional Reserves are specified for spotted owl

activity centers, certain LS/OG 1s and 2s, occupied marbled murrelet sites, and for certain

Protection Buffers (see Section C of these standards and guidelines). 

Riparian protection in Adaptive Management Areas should be comparable to that prescribed

for other federal land areas. For example, Key Watersheds with aquatic conservation

emphasis within Adaptive Management Areas must have a full watershed analysis and initial

Riparian Reserves comparable to those for Tier 1 Key Watersheds. Riparian objectives (in

terms of ecological functions) in other portions of Adaptive Management Areas should have

expectations comparable to Tier 2 Key Watersheds where applicable. However, flexibility is

provided to achieve these conditions, if desired, in a manner different from that prescribed

for other areas and to conduct bonafide research projects within riparian zones.
Adaptive Management Areas D-10

At the same time, any analysis of Riparian Reserve widths must also consider the

contribution of these reserves to other, including terrestrial, species. Watershed analysis

should take into account all species that were intended to be benefited by the prescribed

Riparian Reserve widths. Those species include fish, mollusks, amphibians, lichens, fungi,

bryophytes, vascular plants, American marten, red tree voles, bats, marbled murrelets, and

northern spotted owls. The specific issue for spotted owls is retention of adequate habitat

conditions for dispersal.

Standards and guidelines for matrix management in Section C of these standards and

guidelines (there is no matrix in Adaptive Management Areas) provide specific measures for

coarse woody debris, and for green tree and snag retention, for the matrix. The intent of the

measures must also be met in Adaptive Management Areas, but specific standards and

guidelines are not prescribed for these areas.

Provide additional protection for caves, mines, and abandoned wooden bridges and

buildings that are used as roost sites for bats.

Most bat species occurring in the Pacific Northwest roost and hibernate in crevices in

protected sites. Suitable roost sites and hibernacula, however, fall within a narrow range of

temperature and moisture conditions. Sites commonly used by bats include caves, mines,

snags and decadent trees, wooden bridges, and old buildings. Additional provisions for the

retention of large snags and decadent trees are included in the standard and guideline for

green tree patches in the matrix. Caves, mines, and abandoned wooden bridges and

buildings, however, are extremely important roost and hibernation sites, and require

additional protection to ensure that their value as habitat is maintained.

This provision is intended to apply in matrix forests and Adaptive Management Areas, and

elements such as protection of known occupied caves should be considered for other land

allocations. Conduct surveys of crevices in caves, mines, and abandoned wooden bridges and

buildings for the presence of roosting bats, including fringed myotis, silver-haired bats, longeared myotis, long-legged myotis, and pallid bats. For the purposes of this standard and

guideline, caves are defined as in the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988 as "any

naturally occurring void, cavity, recess, or system of interconnected passages which occur

beneath the surface of the earth or within a cliff or ledge ( . . . but not including any . . . manmade excavation) and which is large enough to permit an individual to enter, whether or not

the entrance is naturally formed or man-made." Searches should be conducted during the day

in the summer (to locate day roosts and maternity colonies), at night during the late summer

and fall (to locate night roosts, which are important for reproduction), and during the day in

the winter (to locate hibernacula). If bats are found, identify the species using the site and

determine for what purpose it is being used by bats. As an interim measure, timber harvest is

prohibited within 250 feet of sites containing bats. Management standards and guidelines

that may be included as mitigation measures in project or activity plans will be developed for

the site. These standards will be developed following an inventory and mapping of resources.

The purpose of the standards and guidelines will be protection of the site from destruction,

vandalism, disturbance from road construction or blasting, or any other activity that could

change cave or mine temperatures or drainage patterns. The size of the 
Adaptive Management Areas D-11

buffer, and types of activities allowed within the buffer, may be modified through the

standards developed for the specific site. Retention of abandoned bridges or buildings must

be made contingent on safety concerns. 

Townsend's big-eared bats are of concern to state wildlife agencies in both Washington and

Oregon. These bats are strongly associated with caves, and are extremely sensitive to

disturbance, especially from recreational cavers. When Townsend's big-eared bats are found

occupying caves or mines on federal land, the appropriate agency should be notified, and

management prescriptions for that site should include special consideration for potential

impacts on this species. 

Modify site treatment practices, particularly the use of fire and pesticides, and modify

harvest methods to minimize soil and litter disturbance.

Many species of soil and litter-dwelling organisms, such as fungi and arthropods, are

sensitive to soil and litter disturbance. Site treatments should be prescribed which will

minimize intensive burning, unless appropriate for certain specific habitats, communities or

stand conditions. Prescribed fires should be planned to minimize the consumption of litter

and coarse woody debris. Other aspects to this standard and guideline include minimizing

soil and litter disturbance that may occur as a result of yarding and operation of heavy

equipment, and reducing the intensity and frequency of site treatments. Soil compaction, and

removal or disturbance of humus layers and coarse woody debris, may impact populations of

fungi and arthropods. These provisions are intended to apply throughout the matrix forests

and within the Adaptive Management Areas.

Provide for old-growth fragments in watersheds where little remains.

Matrix standards and guidelines on page C-44 of these standards and guidelines specify

retention of old-growth fragments in fifth field watersheds containing less than 15 percent of

such stands. In Adaptive Management Areas, less than 15 percent of fifth field watershed in

late-successional forest should be considered as a threshold for analysis rather than a strict

standard and guideline, and the role of remaining stands of late-successional forests must be

fully considered in watershed analysis before they can be modified.

Hierarchy of Standards and Guidelines Within Adaptive Management Areas

In summary, management activities in all the Adaptive Management Areas will be conducted

to achieve the objectives described in these standards and guidelines. Standards and

guidelines for Congressionally Reserved Areas or Late-Successional Reserves must be

followed when they occur within Adaptive Management Areas, except that the Adaptive

Management Area plans for the Finney and Northern Coast Adaptive Management Areas

may change the Late-Successional Reserve designations in those areas. Flexibility is

provided to meet objectives for Riparian Reserves and Key Watersheds. Full watershed

analysis will be conducted prior to new management activities in identified Key Watersheds

within Adaptive Management Areas. Standards and guidelines of current plans and draft

plan preferred alternatives (see exceptions on page C-3 of these standards and guidelines)

need to be considered during planning and implementation of activities within Adaptive

Management 
Adaptive Management Areas D-12

Areas, and they may be modified in Adaptive Management Area plans based on site-specific

analysis. Otherwise, standards and guidelines are to be developed to meet the objectives of

the Adaptive Management Area and the overall strategy. Coordination with the Regional

Ecosystem Office through the Regional Interagency Executive Committee is required.

Descriptions of the Adaptive Management Areas

Adaptive Management Areas are shown on the maps described on page A-6 of these

standards and guidelines. Adaptive Management Areas would contribute to accomplishing

the objectives of these standards and guidelines, such as protection or enhancement of

riparian habitat and provision for well-distributed late-successional forest habitat. Detailed

prescriptions for achieving such objectives are not provided, however, in order to permit

managers to develop and test alternative approaches applicable to their areas and in a

manner consistent with existing environmental and other laws. 

Unlike tables elsewhere in these standards and guidelines that show only Federal Acres

outside of Late-Successional Reserves and Congressional Reserves, the sizes listed below

include all acres within the Adaptive Management Area boundaries, including all land

allocations and ownerships. 

Name: Applegate Adaptive Management Area, Oregon

Size: 277,500 acres

Ownership: Medford District Bureau of Land Management; Rogue River and

Siskiyou National Forests; potentially state and private lands.

Associated Communities: Grants Pass and Medford, Oregon; Jackson and Josephine

Counties, Oregon; and Siskiyou County, California.

Emphasis: Development and testing of forest management practices,

including partial cutting, prescribed burning, and low impact

approaches to forest harvest (e.g., aerial systems) that provide 

for a broad range of forest values, including late-successional

forest and high quality riparian habitat. Late-Successional

Reserves are included in the Adaptive Management Area

boundaries.

Name: Central Cascades Adaptive Management Area, Oregon

Size: 155,700 acres

Ownership: Willamette National Forest; Eugene District Bureau of Land 

Management; potentially state and private lands.

Associated Communities: Eugene, Springfield, and Sweet Home, Oregon. 

Emphasis: Intensive research on ecosystem and landscape processes and its

application to forest management in experiments and

demonstrations at the stand and watershed level; approaches for

integrating forest and stream management objectives and on

implications of natural disturbance regimes; and management of 
Adaptive Management Areas D-13

young and mature stands to accelerate development of latesuccessional conditions, a specific management objective for the

forests within the Moose Lake block as well as in other portions

of the Adaptive Management Area to be selected. Current status

of the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest as an Experimental

Forest (i.e., maintenance of control areas and full flexibility to

conduct experiments, is retained). One Late-Successional

Reserve is included in the area.

Name: Cispus Adaptive Management Area, Washington

Size: 143,900 acres

Ownership: Gifford Pinchot National Forest; potentially state and private 

lands.

Associated Communities: Randle, Morton, and Packwood, Washington; Lewis and

Skamania Counties, Washington.

Emphasis: Development and testing of innovative approaches at stand, 

landscape, and watershed level to integration of timber 

production with maintenance of late-successional forests, healthy

riparian zones, and high quality recreational values.

Name: Finney Adaptive Management Area, Washington

Size: 98,400 acres

Ownership: Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest; potentially state and 

private lands.

Associated Communities: Darrington, Washington; Skagit and Snohomish Counties,

Washington.

Emphasis: Restoration of late-successional and riparian habitat components.

Because most late-successional forests have already been

harvested, requirements for marbled murrelet include: (1)

surveying for and protecting all occupied murrelet sites; (2)

retaining LS/OG1s, LS/OG2s, and owl additions (from the

Scientific Panel on Late-Successional Forest Ecosystems, 1991)

as Late-Successional Reserves within the Adaptive Management

Areas. These reserves should be managed as stipulated for such

reserves under these standards and guidelines. However, because

much of the Adaptive Management Area is Late-Successional

Reserve, primarily designated for a single species about which

information is still being developed, the designation and/or

standards and guidelines for Late-Successional Reserves may be

reconsidered in the Adaptive Management Area plan. Relaxation

of the Late-Successional Reserve status is not necessarily

assumed; proposals will require careful analysis to assure

consistency with the Endangered Species Act and National

Forest Management Act requirements, 
Adaptive Management Areas D-14

new marbled murrelet information, and overall objectives of

these standards and guidelines. Sites occupied by spotted owls

(pairs or territorial singles) will be protected by establishing

Late-Successional Reserves using procedures to delineate

Reserved Pair Areas described on page D-16 of these standards

and guidelines.

Name: Goosenest Adaptive Management Area, California

Size: 172,900 acres

Ownership: Klamath National Forest; potentially private lands.

Associated Communities: Yreka, Montague, Dorris, and Hornbrook California; Siskiyou

County, California.

Emphasis: Development of ecosystem management approaches, including

use of prescribed burning and other silvicultural techniques, for

management of pine forests, including objectives related to forest

health, production and maintenance of late-successional forest

and riparian habitat, and commercial timber production.

Name: Hayfork Adaptive Management Area, California

Size: 488,500 acres

Ownership: Shasta-Trinity and Six Rivers National Forests and Yreka

District Bureau of Land Management; potentially private and

state lands.

Associated Communities: Hayfork, California; Trinity and Humboldt Counties, California.

Emphasis: Development, testing, and application of forest management

practices, including partial cutting, prescribed burning, and lowimpact approaches to forest harvest, which provide for a broad

range of forest values, including commercial timber production

and provision of late-successional and high quality riparian

habitat. Maintain identified Late-Successional Reserves; conduct

full watershed analysis in critical watersheds.

Name: Little River Adaptive Management Area, Oregon

Size: 91,800 acres

Ownership: Umpqua National Forest and Roseburg District Bureau of Land 

Management; potentially private and state lands.

Associated Communities: Roseburg and Myrtle Creek, Oregon; Douglas County, Oregon.

Emphasis: Development and testing of approaches to integration of 

intensive timber production with restoration and maintenance of

high quality riparian habitat.
Adaptive Management Areas D-15

Name: Northern Coast Range Adaptive Management Area, Oregon

Size: 250,000 acres

Ownership: Siuslaw National Forest and Salem District Bureau of Land 

Management; with potential participation by the Oregon 

Department of Forestry and private landowners.

Associated Communities: Tillamook, Willamina, and Grand Ronde, Oregon; Polk,

Yamhill, Tillamook, and Washington Counties, Oregon.

Emphasis: Management for restoration and maintenance of latesuccessional forest habitat, consistent with marbled murrelet

guidelines noted below. Conduct watershed analysis of the

Nestucca River drainage. Subsequently, the Oregon Department

of Forestry will be invited to collaborate in development of a

comprehensive strategy for conservation of the fisheries and

other elements of biological diversity in the northern Oregon

Coast Ranges. Because most late-successional forests have

already been harvested, requirements for marbled murrelet

include: (1) surveying for and protecting all occupied murrelet

sites; (2) retaining LS/OG1s, LS/OG2s, and owl additions (from

the Scientific Panel on Late-Successional Forest Ecosystems,

1991) as Late-Successional Reserves within the Adaptive

Management Areas. These reserves should be managed as

stipulated for such reserves under these standards and guidelines.

However, because much of the Adaptive Management Area is

Late-Successional Reserve, primarily designated for a single

species about which information is still being developed, the

designation and/or standards and guidelines for LateSuccessional Reserves may be reconsidered in the Adaptive

Management Area plan. Relaxation of the Late-Successional

Reserve status is not necessarily assumed; proposals will require

careful analysis to assure consistency with the Endangered

Species Act and National Forest Management Act requirements,

new marbled murrelet information, and overall objectives of

these standards and guidelines. In the interim, the maximum age

for thinning within Late-Successional Reserves in this Adaptive

Management Area is 110 years. Northern spotted owl sites will

be protected by establishing Reserved Pair Areas described on

page D-16 of these standards and guidelines.

Name: Olympic Adaptive Management Area, Washington

Size: 150,400 acres

Ownership: Olympic National Forest and potentially Washington

Department of Natural Resources, Indian Reservations, and

private lands.

Associated Communities: Jefferson, Clallam, Grays Harbor, and Mason Counties, 
Adaptive Management Areas D-16

Washington.

Emphasis: Create a partnership with the Olympic State Experimental Forest

established by Washington Department of Natural Resources.

Develop and test innovative approaches at the stand and

landscape level for integration of ecological and economic

objectives, including restoration of structural complexity to

simplified forests and streams and development of more diverse

managed forests through appropriate silvicultural approaches

such as long rotations and partial retention. All occupied marbled

murrelet sites will be surveyed for and protected. LS/OG 1 and

LS/OG 2 are to be managed as Late-Successional Reserve except

in the Quinault Special Management Area. The Quinault Special

Management Area included within this Adaptive Management

Area will continue to be managed in accordance with Public Law

100-638 which designated the area.

Name: Snoqualmie Pass Adaptive Management Area, Washington

Size: 212,700 acres

Ownership: Wenatchee and Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forests; Plum

Creek Timber Company and other private landowners; state.

Associated Communities: Cle Elum and Roslyn, Washington; Kittitas and King Counties,

Washington.

Emphasis: Development and implementation, with the participation of the

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, of a scientifically credible,

comprehensive plan for providing late-successional forest on the

"checkerboard" lands. This plan should recognize the area as a 

critical connective link in north-south movement of organisms in

the Cascade Range.

Delineation and Management of Reserved Pair Areas

The following standards and guidelines apply to Reserved Pair Areas specified for the

Finney and Northern Coast Range Adaptive Management Areas.

1. For each Reserved Pair Area, delineate an area surrounding the owl activity center with

an acreage at least equal to the median home range size for pairs in that province. Use

data from the spotted owl study area that is most similar to the site being considered (see

Table C-1 on page C-24 of these standards and guidelines). This area will be delineated

to encompass as much suitable northern spotted owl habitat as possible, and the habitat

will be as close to the owl activity center as possible. Reserve all suitable habitat in that

area from timber harvest. If the habitat acreage does not at least equal the median

amount found for owl pairs in the province (see Table C-2 on page C-25 of these

standards and guidelines), additional habitat must be provided from the next best habitat

available in the home range area, or by expanding the area to incorporate additional

suitable northern spotted owl habitat. Use logical physical boundaries to facilitate

management of the area. 
Adaptive Management Areas D-17

Late-Successional Reserve management standards and guidelines for salvage and other

multiple-use activities would generally apply in the suitable habitat portion of the

Reserved Pair Area.

2. In the Reserved Pair Areas, allow for management of currently unsuitable areas

consistent with Late-Successional Reserve management standards and guidelines for

silviculture and salvage. Management of other multiple-use activities in the unsuitable

habitat should follow standards and guidelines from current plans and draft plan

preferred alternatives (see Section C of these standards and guidelines), which may

allow some activities that would not be consistent with Late-Successional Reserve

management standards and guidelines.
Implementation E-1

E. Implementation

Introduction

These standards and guidelines will be implemented on lands administered by the Forest

Service and BLM within the range of the northern spotted owl. Under these standards and

guidelines, management activities will meet National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

requirements. Resource management activities will be subject to site-specific environmental

analysis and appropriate public participation before they are conducted. This will involve

analysis of cumulative and other environmental effects.

These standards and guidelines provide a strategy for the entire range of the northern spotted

owl that includes land allocations, and standards and guidelines that cross physiographic

provinces, and Forest Service and BLM administrative boundaries. Management activities

will be in accordance with the land allocations, and standards and guidelines prescribed in

these standards and guidelines.

Monitoring

Monitoring is an essential component of natural resource management because it provides

information on the relative success of management strategies. The implementation of these

standards and guidelines will be monitored to ensure that management actions are meeting

the objectives of the prescribed standards and guidelines, and that they comply with laws and

management policy. Monitoring will provide information to determine if the standards and

guidelines are being followed (implementation monitoring), verify if they are achieving the

desired results (effectiveness monitoring), and determine if underlying assumptions are

sound (validation monitoring). Some effectiveness and most validation monitoring will be

accomplished by formal research. 

Monitoring results will provide managers with the information to determine whether a goal

has been met, and whether to continue or to modify the management direction. Findings

obtained through monitoring, together with research and other new information, will provide

a basis for adaptive management changes to the selected alternative. The processes of

monitoring and adaptive management share the goal of improving effectiveness and

permitting dynamic response to increased knowledge and a changing landscape. The

monitoring program itself will also not remain static. The monitoring plan will be

periodically evaluated to ascertain whether the monitoring questions and standards are still

relevant, and will be adjusted as appropriate. Some monitoring items may be discontinued

and others added as knowledge and issues change with implementation.

Monitoring will be conducted at multiple levels and scales. These may include site-specific

projects; designated areas such as Late-Successional Reserves, Riparian Reserves and the

matrix; watersheds; administrative units; physiographic provinces or river basins; states;

and the planning area or region. At the project level, monitoring will examine how well

specific 
Implementation E-2

standards and guidelines have been applied on the ground and how effectively they produce

expected results. Monitoring at broader levels will measure how successfully projects and

other activities have achieved the objectives, goals, and/or desired future conditions of those

management areas. Monitoring will be conducted in a manner to accommodate the multiple

levels and scales so that localized information may be compiled and considered in a broader

regional context, and thereby address both local and regional issues.

The monitoring process will collect information on a sample basis. Monitoring could be so

costly as to be prohibitive if it is not carefully and reasonably designed. It will not be

necessary or desirable to monitor each standard and guideline of every project. Unnecessary

detail and unacceptable costs will be avoided by focusing on key monitoring questions and

proper sampling methods. The level and intensity of monitoring will vary, depending on the

sensitivity of the resource or area and the scope of the management activity. 

Monitoring will be coordinated among appropriate agencies and organizations in order to

enhance the efficiency and usefulness of the results across a variety of administrative units

and provinces. The approach will build on past and present monitoring work. Current

monitoring plans will continue to be used where appropriate. In addition, specific monitoring

protocols, criteria, goals, and reporting formats will be developed for these standards and

guidelines, subject to review and guidance of the Regional Ecosystem Office. This guidance

will be used to revise current monitoring plans and facilitate the process of aggregating and

analyzing information on province or regional levels. Each administrative unit will continue

to be responsible for the collection, compilation, and analysis of much of the data gained

through monitoring activities. Province teams and the Regional Ecosystem Office will

compile and analyze information at larger scales. 

The monitoring program will involve a long-term commitment to gathering and evaluating

data on environmental conditions and management implementation. In the Forest Service

Pacific Northwest Region's Forest Monitoring and Evaluation Guide (1993), the Regional

Forester stated, "All programs and projects should contain appropriate levels of monitoring

funds in their costs ---or they should not be undertaken." Similar commitments to monitoring

were made in the BLM western Oregon Draft Resource Management Plans and

Environmental Impact Statements. For example, the Roseburg District Draft RMP/EIS

states, "Timber sale volumes and associated programs will be reduced if annual funding is

not sufficient to support the relevant actions assumed in these standards and guidelines,

including mitigation and monitoring. The extent of the reduction will be based on the

principle of program balance as envisioned in the plan." The current monitoring plans and

commitments will remain in effect, although they will be revised to reflect the direction in

these standards and guidelines.

Current plans and draft plan preferred alternatives require monitoring of resources,

activities, or effects, and will continue to do so under all alternatives. The monitoring items

or elements of the current plans and draft plan preferred alternatives include soil, water, air,

vegetation, Wild and Scenic Rivers, visual resources, cultural resources, lands, minerals,

range, wildlife, fisheries, timber, and special areas (e.g., Areas of Critical Environmental

Concern and Research Natural Areas). These broad categories include monitoring for

species listed under the Endangered Species Act, and activities subject to the Clean Water

Act, Clean Air Act and other laws, regulations and policies. Where relevant, these current

monitoring plans include monitoring objectives or questions, sampling methods or

techniques, criteria, standards, 
Implementation E-3

frequency of monitoring, evaluation and reporting procedures, and associated costs for each

item or element. The various aspects of these current plans and draft plan preferred

alternatives will remain in effect, and may be revised as appropriate to reflect the direction in

these standards and guidelines. The results of monitoring and associated evaluations will

continue to be shared with the public.

Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

Monitoring is an important component in implementing the ecosystem management strategy

prescribed in these standards and guidelines. Due to the broad scope of ecosystem

management, the monitoring effort emphasizes coordination and cooperation between

various federal, state, and local agencies; American Indian tribes; and other interests.

Conceptual Framework 

Scope 

One of the challenges in designing a monitoring network is accommodating a variety of

geographic scales (e.g., region, province, watershed, and site) and land ownerships in a

manner that allows localized information to be compiled and placed in a broader, regional

context. 

Monitoring at any scale should:

* Detect changes in ecological systems from both individual and cumulative management

actions and natural events

* Provide a basis for natural resource policy decisions 

* Provide standardized data

* Compile information systematically

* Link overall information management strategies for consistent implementation

* Ensure prompt analysis and application of data in the adaptive management process

* Distribute results in a timely manner

Relationship to Adaptive Management Process, Research, and

Watershed Analysis

Adaptive Management

Adaptive management is based on monitoring that is sufficiently sensitive to detect relevant

ecological changes. In addition, the success of adaptive management depends on the

accuracy and credibility of information obtained through inventories and monitoring.

Research

Close coordination and interaction between monitoring and research also are essential for the

adaptive management process to succeed. Data obtained through systematic and statistically 
Implementation E-4

valid monitoring can be used by scientists to develop research hypotheses related to priority

issues. Conversely, the results obtained through research can be used to further refine the

protocols and strategies used to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of these standards

and guidelines.

Watershed Analysis

Watershed analysis is a technically rigorous procedure with the purpose of developing and

documenting a scientifically-based understanding of the ecological structure, functions,

processes, and interactions occurring within a watershed (see Section B of these standards

and guidelines). Watershed analysis is one of the principal analyses that will be used to meet

the ecosystem management objectives of these standards and guidelines. Information from

watershed analysis will be used in developing monitoring strategies and objectives. 

Specific to monitoring and evaluation, the results and findings from watershed analysis are

used to reveal the most useful indicators for monitoring environmental change, detect

magnitude and duration of changes in conditions, formulate and test hypotheses about the

causes of the changes, understand these causes and predict impacts, and manage the

ecosystem for desired outcomes. Watershed analysis may result in additional monitoring

questions. Watershed analysis will provide information about patterns and processes within

a watershed and provide information for monitoring at that scale. 

Components of the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan

The following framework focuses on the purposes for monitoring and proposes units of

measure for the monitoring process.

Types of Monitoring

Three basic types of monitoring (implementation, effectiveness, and validation) will be

applied to meet the objectives of these standards and guidelines and evaluate the efficacy of

management practices. These three types of monitoring encompass a spectrum of

monitoring, although some agencies use different terminology (e.g., trend, program

evaluation).

Evaluation Questions

Each basic monitoring question can be expressed in more definite terms that will lead to

more specific and directed measurements, as explained in the following text.

1. Implementation Monitoring

Implementation monitoring determines if the standards and guidelines were followed. 

Implementation monitoring asks: Does the project and/or activity follow the direction in its

management plan? Generally, implementation monitoring answers this question by

determining if the standards and guidelines were correctly applied and followed.

Implementation monitoring considers three strategies: aquatic, terrestrial, and social and 
Implementation E-5

economic. The components of these strategies include:

* Land allocations with specific boundaries

* Standards and guidelines for managing the land allocations, including Key Watersheds

* Watershed analysis

* Social and economic effects

* An adaptive management process, or learning framework

EVALUATION QUESTION: Are the aquatic, terrestrial, and social and economic resources

being managed according to the standards and guidelines? To address this question,

implementation monitoring is organized around land allocations, including types of activities

allowed and projected conditions within each allocation. For the most part, this approach

focuses on areas broader than specific project sites and restricts evaluation questions to the

fundamental elements and components of these standards and guidelines. This broader scope

is consistent with the ecosystem approach. 

Key items that require specific monitoring include standards and guidelines of:

* Late-Successional Reserves 

* Riparian Reserves

* Matrix 

* Adaptive Management Areas

* Key Watersheds

* Watershed analysis

Late-Successional Reserves - Key items to monitor include:

* Timber harvests consistent with standards and guidelines and with Regional Ecosystem

Office review requirements.

* Other management activities in the Late-Successional Reserve consistent with the

standards and guidelines (e.g., prescribed fire and resulting emissions)

* Late-Successional Reserve assessment completed

* Management activities consistent with the Late-Successional Reserve assessment?

Riparian Reserves - Key items to monitor include:

* Width and integrity of Riparian Reserves (i.e., did the conditions that existed before

management activities were conducted, change in ways that are not in accordance with

the standards and guidelines?)

* Completion of watershed analysis prior to management activities where required

* Management activities in Riparian Reserves consistent with standards and guidelines

Matrix - Key items to be monitored include: 

* Number and distribution of green trees left in harvested areas

* Snags, coarse woody debris

* Completion of watershed analysis prior to harvesting late-successional stands in

watersheds with less than 15 percent late-successional forest remaining
Implementation E-6

* Prescribed burning and resulting emissions

Adaptive Management Areas - In Adaptive Management Areas, implementation

evaluations of the standards and guidelines are required, including the requirement that an

Adaptive Management Area plan be developed that establishes future desired conditions.

Key items to monitor in Adaptive Management Areas include:

* Completion of an Adaptive Management Area plan

* Measurement of conditions that have been agreed to in the Adaptive Management Area

plan

Key Watersheds - Key items to monitor include:

* Watershed analysis prior to management activities

* Presence and timing of activities, including restoration projects

* No new roads in roadless areas

* No net increase in roads

In evaluating these questions, it is necessary to consider the roles Key Watersheds play in the

Aquatic Conservation Strategy: refugia for at-risk stocks of anadromous salmonids and

resident fish species, and sources of high quality water.

Watershed Analysis - Key item to monitor:

* Presence and timing of watershed analysis

Participation - Key items to monitor include:

* Involvement of multiple agencies, the public, and others in planning, implementing, and

monitoring watershed analysis

* Opportunities to share information (applicable to all parties such as agencies, publics,

communities)

* Identification of clear expectations and responsibilities

* Active partnerships

2. Effectiveness Monitoring

Effectiveness monitoring takes a step further by evaluating if application of the management

plan achieved the desired goals, and if the objectives of these standards and guidelines were

met. Success may be measured against the standard of desired future condition (sometimes

referred to as reference condition). For example: Does the management of this resource

maintain or restore the habitat for late-successional associated species? 

Effectiveness monitoring will be undertaken at a variety of reference sites in geographically

and ecologically similar areas. These sites will be located on a number of different scales,

and will require the assistance of research statisticians to design an appropriate sampling

regime.
Implementation E-7

Aquatic Ecosystems - Evaluation Question: Is the ecological health of the aquatic

ecosystems recovering or sufficiently maintained to support stable and well-distributed

populations of fish species and stocks?

While many factors influence aquatic ecosystem integrity, the variables to be monitored will

include important habitat requirements identified by research and watershed analysis, and

represent a range of values indicative of a healthy system. Variables may be surrogates

representing other physical, biological, and/or ecological processes. Variables must be

quantifiable and measurable in a repeatable way. A range of values for the variables

measured will often result from the spatial and temporal variability found in a particular

geographic area. Variables must describe conditions for functional, healthy aquatic

ecosystems.

A core set of inventory elements will be collected for streams. Core inventory elements are

the minimum set of variables to be collected at all scales. In all cases, standardized

measurement and reporting protocols will be determined and are essential for consistency.

The health of aquatic and riparian ecosystems is dependent on water quality. Effectiveness

monitoring that assesses the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of aquatic

ecosystems is necessary to ensure conditions that will maintain water quality and support

aquatic organisms. The Clean Water Act directs that states adopt water quality standards

and criteria as necessary to protect designated beneficial uses. The standards and criteria of

the Clean Water Act, which apply to both federal and nonfederal lands, will be used in

effectiveness monitoring to determine if water quality and the health of aquatic systems are

being maintained. 

An emphasis of the monitoring of aquatic ecosystems will be to determine if actions are

meeting the Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives. The Aquatic Conservation Strategy

emphasizes watershed health and maintenance of the natural physical and biological integrity

of aquatic and riparian habitats and watersheds. As such, monitoring will include aquatic,

riparian, and watershed conditions and the processes in a watershed to determine if they

achieve Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives.

The wide range of natural variation and complex interaction of individual stream habitat

components (e.g., numbers of pools, pieces of large wood, percent fine sediment, and water

temperature) makes it difficult to establish relevant quantitative management directives for

stream habitat components. Because of individual stream and watershed diversity and

differences, it is also difficult to quantify direct linkages among processes and functions

outside the stream channel to in-channel conditions and biological components. Watershedspecific objectives, based on watershed analysis, are necessary to accommodate the natural

variation among individual streams and watersheds.

Key monitoring items include:

* Pool frequency and quality (width, depth, and cover)

* Percent fine sediment

* Coarse woody debris (size and quantity)

* Water temperature
Implementation E-8

* Width-to-depth ratio

* Bank stability and lower bank angle

Biological Diversity, Late-Successional and Old-Growth Forest Ecosystems - The

purpose and need of these standards and guidelines includes, ". . . to take an ecosystem

approach to forest management; maintain and restore biological diversity as it applies to

late-successional and old-growth forest ecosystems." This purpose includes forest processes

as well as forest species.

Evaluation questions: 

* Is the forest ecosystem functioning as a productive and sustainable ecological unit?

* Is the use of prescribed fire or fire suppression maintaining the natural processes of the

forest ecosystem?

* Are desired habitat conditions for the northern spotted owl and the marbled murrelet

maintained where adequate, and restored where inadequate?

* Are habitat conditions for late-successional forest associated species maintained where

adequate, and restored where inadequate?

* Are desired habitat conditions for at-risk fish stocks maintained where adequate, and

restored where inadequate?

* Is a functional interacting, late-successional ecosystem maintained where adequate, and

restored where inadequate?

* Did silvicultural treatments benefit the creation and maintenance of late-successional

conditions?

* Will the overall conditions of the watersheds and provinces continue to be productive

over the long term? 

To address these questions, chemical, physical, and biological indicators may need to be

evaluated. A variety of variables can be monitored within each of these categories, and those

selected will address the objectives of specific monitoring plans. The Clean Air Act directs

federal agencies to monitor air pollution emissions from prescribed burning on federal lands

in order to manage prescribed fire operations, verify air quality models, and assess air

quality impacts. 

Indicators for assessing the condition and trends include:

* Land use data

* Seral development and shifts of forest plant communities

* Locations and concentrations of plant diseases and insect infestations

* Amount of fuels by category 

* Air quality

* Riparian and stream habitat condition by stream class

* Water quality

Key monitoring items include:

* Size, location, spatial distribution, species composition, and development of latesuccessional and old-growth forests

* Retention of snags and coarse woody debris
Implementation E-9

* Abundance and diversity of species associated with late-successional forest communities

* Species presence (to calculate species richness i.e., numbers and diversity)

* Percent of land area effected by exotic species

* Structure and composition

* Ecological processes

* Ecosystem functions

* Air quality

Use Levels of Natural Resources - Evaluation Question: Are predictable levels of timber

and nontimber resources available and being produced?

Key items to monitor include:

* Timber harvest levels

* Special forest products (e.g., mushrooms, boughs, and ferns)

* Livestock grazing 

* Mineral extraction

* Recreation

* Scenic quality (including air quality)

* Commercial fishing

Rural Economies and Communities - Evaluation Question: Are local communities and

economies experiencing positive or negative changes that may be associated with federal

forest management?

Key items to monitor include:

* Demographics

* Employment (timber, recreation, forest products, fishing, mining, and grazing)

* Government revenues (Forest Service and BLM receipts)

* Facilities and infrastructure

* Social service burden (welfare, poverty, aid to dependent children, and food stamps)

* Federal assistance programs (loans and grants to state, counties, and communities)

* Business trends (cycles, interest rates, and business openings and closings)

* Taxes (property, sales, and business)

Information for these items are collected by local, county, state, and federal agencies. This

information will be used through the adaptive management process in future planning

efforts. Because of the complexity of the relationships and the number of factors involved in

these items, it is not possible to set specific or definite thresholds or values that would cause

a reevaluation of the goals and overall strategy of these standards and guidelines. 

American Indians and Their Culture - Evaluation Questions: 

* For those trust resources identified in treaties with American Indians, what are their

conditions and trends?

* Are sites of religious and cultural heritage adequately protected?

* Do American Indians have access to and use of forest species, resources, and places 
Implementation E-10

important for cultural, subsistence, or economic reasons, particularly those identified in

treaties?

Key monitoring items include: 

* Condition and trends of the American Indian trust resources

* Effectiveness of the coordination or liaison to assure protection of religious or cultural

heritage sites

* Adequacy of access to resources and to the vicinity of religious or cultural sites

3. Validation Monitoring

Validation monitoring determines if a cause and effect relationship exists between

management activities and the indicators or resource being managed. Validation monitoring

asks: Are the underlying management assumptions correct? Do the maintained or restored

habitat conditions support stable and well-distributed populations of late-successional

associated species?

Among the key set of assumptions that need to be validated is the relationships between

habitat and populations. This requires a strong mix of inventory, monitoring, and research.

Where knowledge gaps exist, research and/or inventory may be needed. Hypotheses can be

proposed and tested through a combination of research and monitoring.

There is one primary evaluation question with regard to the northern spotted owl, the

marbled murrelet, and at-risk fish stocks: Is the population stable or increasing?

Key items to monitor include:

* Northern spotted owls by physiographic province

* Marbled murrelets within their known nesting range

* Populations of fish species and stocks that are listed under the Endangered Species Act

or are considered sensitive or at risk by land management agencies

* Rare species

* The relationship between levels of management intervention and the health and 

maintenance of late-successional and old-growth ecosystems

Special Monitoring Issues and Situations

Natural and Induced Environmental Stressors- A preliminary step in designing any

monitoring scheme is development of a premonitoring assessment or baseline data to define

the natural and management-induced environmental stressors which could act as outside

influences on the outcome of monitoring. Examples of natural stressors are large-scale

disease cycles, climatic cycles, and hot, expansive fires.

Management-induced stressors include habitat simplification; reduced habitat connectivity;

high fire frequency resulting from fire suppression activities; forest diseases resulting from

increased abundance of susceptible host species, loss of natural controls, and introduced 
Implementation E-11

pests; acid precipitation; introduced competitor species; and changes in predator-prey

dynamics.

Rare and Declining Species - Monitoring will address rare and declining species - Rare

species are plants or animals classified as:

* Federally threatened or endangered species

* Federally proposed threatened or endangered species

* Federal Candidate Species

* State listed species

* Forest Service sensitive species

* BLM special status species

* Other infrequently encountered species not considered by any agency or group as

endangered or threatened and classified in the FEMAT Report as rare

Monitoring for the type, number, size, and condition of special habitats over time will

provide a good indication of the potential health of special habitat-dependent species.

Although all special habitat areas do not support rare species, there is overwhelming

evidence that special habitat types are closely related to the continued existence of certain

rare species. 

Since many rare species are associated with riparian habitats, the Riparian Reserve system

offers potential protection. However, some rare species often are closely associated with or

restricted to specific habitats that are outside Riparian Reserves. 

It is also important to recognize that many species' habitat requirements vary considerably

with age or size of the individual, and with the season. In some cases, more than one special

habitat must be available for the species to successfully complete its life cycle.

While a stable special habitat type through time is not proof that a special habitat-dependent

species population is stable, a decrease in a special habitat type does indicate increased risk

to that species population.

Widely-dispersed species not associated with special habitats usually are associated with as

yet undefined habitats within the general upland environment. Species with this type of

distribution are difficult to assess and monitor. Efforts will be made to identify key habitat

components of existing species locations.

A monitoring program for rare and declining species will help to:

* Identify perceived present and future threats

* Increase future possibilities of discovering new locations

* Track their status and trends over time

* Ensure that, in times of limited agency resources, priority attention will be given to

species most at risk

Inventoried locations and special habitats of rare species will be registered in the

multiagency GIS data base. This information will be shared with the State Natural Heritage

Programs. 
Implementation E-12

Steps to Develop an Interagency Monitoring Network

An interagency monitoring network will be developed and implemented using a common

design framework and common indicators (or environmental measurements). This effort will

build on existing agency research and monitoring efforts, and will be accomplished through

the Research and Monitoring Committee established by the Memorandum of Understanding

for Forest Ecosystem Management (see page E-16). 

Specific indicators will be identified within each monitoring component or activity, along

with protocols and methodologies for their measurement and quality assurance. A required

level of detectability, data quality objectives, and precision will be established.

Based on these details, a design framework will be established that permits resulting data to

be integrated through statistical or modeling approaches to provide quantitative inputs to the

adaptive management process. The design framework will accommodate multiple scales and

provide a consistent process for establishing monitoring sites, frequency of sampling, scale

of sampling, and specific techniques for analysis and reporting. 

This approach will ensure that consistent collection, integration, and evaluation of data occur

among projects, watersheds, provinces, agencies, and over long time periods.

The following four-step process will be used to establish such a monitoring network:

1. Identify information needs and develop them into quantitative monitoring objectives.

2. Survey and evaluate existing monitoring activities relevant to monitoring objectives,

focusing on both the indicators and design components.

3. Develop a comprehensive monitoring strategy including statistical designs, indicators,

quality assurance plan, and sampling protocols.

4. Establish linkages between and among agencies and groups.

Adaptive Management

Overview

Adaptive management is a continuing process of action-based planning, monitoring,

researching, evaluating and adjusting with the objective of improving the implementation

and achieving the goals of these standards and guidelines. These standards and guidelines

are based on current scientific knowledge. To be successful, it must have the flexibility to

adapt and respond to new information. Under the concept of adaptive management, new

information will be evaluated and a decision will be made whether to make adjustments or

changes. These standards and guidelines incorporate the concept of adaptive management.

This approach will enable resource managers to determine how well management actions

meet their objectives and what steps are needed to modify activities to increase success or

improve results.

The adaptive management process will be implemented to maximize the benefits and 
Implementation E-13

efficiency of these standards and guidelines. This may result in the refinement of standards

and guidelines, land-use allocations, or amendments to Forest and District Plans. Adaptive

management decisions may vary in scale from individual watersheds, specific forest types,

physiographic provinces, or the entire planning area or region. Adaptive management

modifications that require changes to Regional Guides, or Forest or District Plans will be

adopted following applicable regulatory procedures. However, many adaptive management

modifications may not require changes to Regional Guides, or Forest or District Plans.

The adaptive management concept applies to all lands administered by the Forest Service

and BLM. The 10 Adaptive Management Areas described in Section D of these standards

and guidelines, however, are specific areas dedicated primarily to the objective of

development and testing of new approaches for integration and achievement of ecological

and economic health, and other social objectives.

Adaptive Management Process

This discussion outlines the general concepts of the adaptive management process. An

understanding of what adaptive management means, and does not mean, is important

because the concept applies to all land allocations. The concept of adaptive management is

straightforward and simple: new information is identified, evaluated, and a determination is

made whether to adjust the strategy or goals. Adaptive management is a process of actionbased planning, monitoring, researching, evaluating, and adjusting with the objective of

improving the implementation and achieving the goals of these standards and guidelines. 

While the concept of adaptive management is straightforward, applying it to complex

management strategies requires a more in-depth explanation. What new information would

compel an adjustment to the management strategy? Who decides when and how to make

adjustments? What are the definitions and thresholds of acceptable results? 

The concept of adaptive management acknowledges the need to manage resources under

circumstances that contain varying degrees of uncertainty, and the need to adjust to new

information. Different management strategies, resources, and geographic locations have

degrees of confidence that vary from very high to very low. Although there are

acknowledged gaps in information, there is enough reliable information, field experience,

and research data to proceed with implementation of these standards and guidelines.

Although formal experimentation and research is an important part of the adaptive

management process, application of these standards and guidelines does not constitute

widespread experiments on large areas of public lands and resources. 

Adaptive management is a process that can be associated with any particular management

strategy. The process can be applied successfully to management with differing or changing

goals. Adaptive management is designed to improve implementation and increase the

likelihood of achieving the goals and objectives of these standards and guidelines.

Essential requirements for adaptive management include:

* Clear goals

* Clear standards and guidelines
Implementation E-14

* A process for changing standards and guidelines or goals

* Monitoring and/or research aimed at adaptive management questions

The model displayed in Figure E-1 identifies the various steps, activities, and outline of a

procedure for the adaptive management process. This diagram conveys the general concept,

and is valuable as a starting point, for understanding adaptive management. A full and

detailed explanation of the model, which is beyond the scope of this discussion, would

require that each step be further broken down and defined.

The personnel, organizations, and members of the public who are involved at different steps

of the adaptive management process will vary with the issue being considered. Issues may be

very local; the organization and personnel involved may constitute a Ranger District or BLM

Resource Area, or a work group within them. Issues may also have Forest or BLM District,

province, or regional scope involving personnel and organizations from many levels, units,

and/or agencies. Some issues, such as a technical engineering concern may involve very few

professional disciplines, while others such as an ecosystem concern may involve a broad

interdisciplinary approach. New information that could be the basis for changes through the

adaptive management process may come from many different sources. 

These concepts and model provide the means to answer questions about the what, who, and

how of adaptive management.

Figure E-1. Basic adaptive management model

What new information would compel an adjustment of strategy? New information may come

from monitoring, research, statutory or regulatory changes, organizational or process

assessments, or any number of additional sources. During the evaluation process, personnel

will analyze the information to determine the nature, scope, and importance of the new 
Implementation E-15

information.

Who decides when to adjust the strategy or goals? The answer will depend on the character

and scope of the issue. While public interest and participation will differ with the issue being

considered, the authority to manage the public lands and resources remains by law with the

land management agencies. On a local issue of limited scope, the decision maker may be the

local manager. Broader issues and/or issues of regional scope may involve the Regional

Forester, State Director, Regional Interagency Executive Committee, or Interagency Steering

Committee. 

How are adjustments made to strategies or goals? Any changes in federal land management

decisions, whether arising from adaptive management or any other process, will be subject to

existing regulatory and statutory requirements such as the National Environmental Policy

Act (NEPA). Most adjustments will be within the realm of administrative change, while

others may need to meet formal NEPA requirements. A few adjustments may be beyond the

scope of agency authority and would require statutory changes. 

The adaptive management process can be used for large-scale, highly-complex problems

such as ecosystem management, localized technical problems, and organizational problems.

Fundamentally, adaptive management is the application of the scientific principle of

feedback and adjustment, of identifying and evaluating new information, and adjusting to

improve implementation and to achieve the goals and the objectives of these standards and

guidelines.

Interagency Coordination 

These standards and guidelines call for a high level of coordination and cooperation among

agencies during implementation. Issues will be discussed, objectives clarified, and problems

solved in collaboration. The Memorandum of Understanding for Forest Ecosystem

Management established a framework for coordinated implementation of these standards

and guidelines. The parties to this memorandum of understanding are the Director of the

White House Office on Environmental Policy, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of

Agriculture, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Under

Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere. 

Interagency Groups

The following interagency groups have been established to develop, monitor, and oversee the

implementation of these standards and guidelines. These interagency groups are identified in

the Memorandum of Understanding for Forest Ecosystem Management. They do not

substitute or alter the line of authority of individual agencies (see Figure E-2). 

Interagency Steering Committee

The Interagency Steering Committee will establish overall policies governing the prompt,

coordinated and effective implementation of this plan by all relevant federal agencies, and

address and resolve issues referred to it by the Regional Interagency Executive Committee.

The committee consists of representatives from the offices of the Secretary of the Interior,

Secretary of Agriculture, Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Under

Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere, and is chaired by the Director of the
Implementation E-16

 White House Office on Environmental Policy or the director's designee. A White House

appointed representative of the Interagency Steering Committee serves as interagency

coordinator to provide general oversight and guidance of regional activities.

Regional Interagency Executive Committee (RIEC)

This group consists of the Pacific Northwest federal agency heads of the Forest Service,

Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service,

Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Environmental Protection Agency. Other participants on this

committee include: the National Park Service; Soil Conservation Service; the States of

Washington, Oregon, and California; and three tribal organizations. The RIEC will serve as

the senior regional entity to assure the prompt, coordinated, and successful implementation

of these standards and guidelines. It serves as the principal conduit for communications

between the Interagency Steering Committee and the agencies in the planning area. It will be

responsible for implementing the directives of the Interagency Steering Committee, reporting

regularly on implementation progress, and referring issues relating to the policies or

procedures for implementing these standards and guidelines to the Interagency Steering

Committee. The RIEC's policy and planning decisions and recommendations will be made

collaboratively, and will be consistent with federal and state laws, federal trust

responsibilities, and government-to-government relationships with American Indian tribes.

The RIEC provides direction to the Regional Ecosystem Office, province teams, and the

Research and Monitoring Committee (see below). The RIEC also works with the Regional

Community Economic Revitalization Team (RCERT) to develop criteria and priorities for

ecosystem investment opportunities. 

Regional Ecosystem Office (REO)

This office provides staff work and support to facilitate RIEC decision making and prompt

interagency issue resolution in support of implementation of these standards and guidelines.

It will also be responsible for evaluation of major modifications arising from the adaptive

management process and will coordinate the formulation and implementation of data

standards. This office reports to the RIEC and will be responsible for developing, evaluating,

and resolving consistency and implementation issues with respect to specific topics

including, but not limited to, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), pilot watershed

analyses, restoration guidelines, Endangered Species Act requirements, adaptive

management guidelines, monitoring and research.

Although the standards and guidelines variously refer to the Regional Ecosystem Office for

reviews and other actions, it is understood that the Regional Ecosystem Office recommends

to the Regional Interagency Executive Committee who has responsibility for the decisions.

The decision-making responsibility of the Regional Interagency Executive Committee

described in these standards and guidelines is generally limited to interpretation of standards

and guidelines. Individual land management and consultation agencies retain the decisionmaking authority that is vested in them by statute.

Research and Monitoring Committee

This committee, comprised of full time scientists in the Regional Ecosystem Office and a

standing group of agency liasons provides recommendations to the RIEC on implementation

of these standards and guidelines through monitoring and research plans. The Research and 
Implementation E-17

Monitoring Committee will review and evaluate ongoing research; develop a research plan to

address critical natural resource issues; address biological, social, economic, and adaptive

management research topics; and develop and review scientifically credible, cost efficient

monitoring plans; and facilitate scientific review of proposed changes to the standards and

guidelines. The Research and Monitoring Committee is under the direction of, and is

responsible to, the Regional Interagency Executive Committee, and reports to the RIEC

through the Regional Ecosystem Office.

Province Teams

These teams consist of representatives of federal agencies, states, American Indian tribes,

and others. These teams will provide or coordinate analyses at the province level that can

provide the basis for amendments to Forest and District Plans and will provide monitoring

reports for provinces. Province teams will also encourage and facilitate information

exchange and complementary ecosystem management among federal and nonfederal land

managers. The Interagency Steering Committee and the Regional Interagency Executive

Committee will continue to develop and refine the appropriate role for these teams at the

level of physiographic provinces, Adaptive Management Areas, or specific watersheds.

Figure E-2. Relationships of interagency groups

Planning

Assessments of ecosystem issues may require analysis beyond existing political or

administrative boundaries. At the same time, current statutes, regulations and administrative

responsibilities governing federal land management agencies must recognize, and are based

upon, political and administrative boundaries. A major challenge in ecosystem management

is providing a planning regime in which these fundamentally different perspectives can be

integrated, a task that is especially difficult in the current statutory and regulatory planning 
Implementation E-18

structure. 

As experience is gained in ecosystem management, statutes and regulations may be changed

to provide for different decision points. Until statutes and regulations are changed, provincelevel "plans" or considerations will consist of analysis and coordination to help interpret or

amend existing Forest Plans or District Resource Management Plans. The area delineation

appropriate to this planning structure is shown in Figure E-3, Province planning and analysis

areas.

The term "planning" is often used colloquially to include assessments, analysis, or other

processes that are related to, but distinct from, the planning decision-making process defined

by laws and regulations. Decisions on standards and guidelines and land allocations will be

adopted using the planning structure of existing regulations, which provides for three levels

of plans for the Forest Service (Regional Guides, Forest Plans and project plans) and two

levels of plans for the BLM (District Plans and activity plans). Decisions to change land

allocations, or standards and guidelines will be made only through the adoption, revision, or

amendment of these documents following appropriate public participation, NEPA

procedures, and coordination with the Regional Interagency Executive Committee. 

The FEMAT Report and the SEIS for these standards and guidelines illustrate how different

types of planning-related activities can be used to practice ecosystem management by

assessing relevant issues from a variety of perspectives and facilitating a coordinated

implementation of these standards and guidelines. Ecological "assessments" or "analyses"

are aimed at viewing management issues from ecological perspectives, such as described in

Ecological Principles for Management of Late-Successional Forests in Section B of these

standards and guidelines. Assessments may include other perspectives relevant to land

management decision making such as economic or social factors. These standards and

guidelines also propose coordinating planning activities across administrative boundaries,

such as province plans, Adaptive Management Area plans and Late-Successional Reserve

assessments. Decisions will be made to adopt, revise or amend appropriate decision

documents only when procedures for public participation and decision making have been

followed.

The Record of Decision (with these standards and guidelines) amends existing Forest

Service and BLM management plans. The responsibility for implementing these standards

and guidelines rests with the managers of the Forest Service and BLM units in the planning

area. The interagency structure identified in the Memorandum of Understanding for Forest

Ecosystem Management designates the Interagency Steering Committee and Regional

Interagency Executive Committee to assure the coordinated and effective implementation of

these standards and guidelines, and to support the development and implementation of future

or revised Land and Resource Management Plans. Changes or adjustments to these

standards and guidelines may be made through amendments to those plans required by

regulations as described above. The authority to change or amend those plans remains as

specified in the applicable regulations. The amendments will be reviewed by the Regional

Interagency Executive Committee to assure consistency with the objectives of these

standards and guidelines.

Key Watersheds as a Non-interchangeable Component of PSQ

As Forest and District Plans are completed or amended in the future to reflect the addition of 
Implementation E-19

Figure E-3. Province planning and analysis areas.

The province planning and

analysis areas shown here and

identified for province planning

purposes only, are distinct from

the physiographic provinces

described in Section A and

referenced elsewhere in these

standards and guidelines. The

Eastern Washington Cascades,

Yakima, Deschutes, Klamath

and Northwest Sacramento

province planning and analysis

areas shown on this map include

areas that extend beyond the

range of the northern spotted

owl and are therefore outside the

scope of these standards and

guidelines. These standards and

guidelines (including land

allocations) apply only to the

range of the northern spotted

owl, and there is no requirement

in these standards and guidelines

to do analysis or planning for

those areas outside the range. 
Implementation E-20

these standards and guidelines, units should disaggregate and display Probable Sale Quantity

(PSQ ) as a non-interchangeable component between Key and non-Key Watersheds.

Although no difference in PSQ between these two categories could be identified in the SEIS,

it is recognized that the Aquatic Conservation Strategy objectives and the requirement to do

watershed analysis before management activities can take place implies a higher level of

uncertainty and a potential for future change with respect to future levels of sale offerings

within key Watersheds. In this way, offerings affected by any changes or concerns in Key

Watersheds, or dependent upon Key Watershed-related funding such as that needed for

Watershed Analysis, can be identified and monitored.

Watershed Analysis

Watershed analysis is one of the principal analyses that will be used to meet the ecosystem

management objectives of these standards and guidelines. Watershed analyses will be the

mechanism to support ecosystem management described in these standards and guidelines at

approximately the 20 to 200 square mile watershed level. Watershed analysis, as described

here, focuses on its broad role in implementing the ecosystem management objectives

prescribed by these standards and guidelines. The use of watershed analysis, as described in

the Aquatic Conservation Strategy (starting on page B-9 of these standards and guidelines),

is a more narrow focus and is just one aspect of its role.

Watershed analysis will focus on collecting and compiling information within the watershed

that is essential for making sound management decisions. It will be an analytical process, not

a decision-making process with a proposed action requiring NEPA documentation. It will

serve as the basis for developing project-specific proposals, and determining monitoring and

restoration needs for a watershed. Some analysis of issues or resources may be included in

broader scale analyses because of their scope. The information from the watershed analyses

will contribute to decision making at all levels. Project-specific NEPA planning will use

information developed from watershed analysis. For example, if watershed analysis shows

that restoring certain resources within a watershed could contribute to achieving landscape or

ecosystem management objectives, then subsequent decisions will need to address that

information.

The results of watershed analyses may include a description of the resource needs, issues, the

range of natural variability, spatially explicit information that will facilitate environmental

and cumulative effects analyses to comply with NEPA regulations, and the processes and

functions operating within the watershed. Watershed analysis will identify potentially

disjunct approaches and conflicting objectives within watersheds. The information from

watershed analysis will be used to develop priorities for funding and implementing actions

and projects, and will be used to develop monitoring strategies and objectives. The

participation in watershed analysis of adjacent landowners, private citizens, interest groups,

industry, government agencies, and others will be promoted. 

Watershed analysis will be an ongoing, iterative process that will help define important

resource and information needs. As watershed analysis is further developed and refined, it

will describe the processes and interactions for all applicable resources. It will be an

information-gathering and analysis process, but will not be a comprehensive inventory

process. It will build on information collected from detailed, site-specific analyses.

Information gathering and analysis will be related to management needs, and not be 
Implementation E-21

performed for their own sake. While generally watershed analysis will organize, collate, and

describe existing information, there may be critical information needs that must be met

before completing the analysis. In those instances, the additional information will be

collected before completing the watershed analysis. In other instances, information needs

may be identified that are not required for completing the watershed analysis but should be

met for subsequent analyses, planning, or decisions. 

Watershed analysis is a technically rigorous procedure with the purpose of developing and

documenting a scientifically-based understanding of the ecological structures, functions,

processes and interactions occurring within a watershed (see the Aquatic Conservation

Strategy in Section B of these standards and guidelines). The scope of the analysis for

implementing the ecosystem management objectives of these standards and guidelines may

include all aspects of the ecosystem. Some of these aspects include beneficial uses;

vegetative patterns and distribution; flow phenomena such as vegetation corridors, streams,

and riparian corridors; wind; fire (wild and prescribed fire, and fire suppression); wildlife

migration routes; dispersal habitat; terrestrial vertebrate distribution; locally significant

habitats; human use patterns throughout the ecosystem; cumulative effects; and hydrology.

The number and detail of these aspects considered will depend on the issues pertaining to a

given watershed. 

Information Resource Management

An interagency Geographic Information System (GIS) data base will be developed to

coordinate efforts in the collection of data and the development of information to support

planning within watersheds, provinces, and the region. 

Consultation and Coordination Process

Consultation under the Endangered Species Act will emphasize an integrated ecosystem

approach. This will include involving the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine

Fisheries Service when the land management agencies begin to develop their plans for a

particular area so their views can be made known. Concurrent coordination with the

Environmental Protection Agency on water quality standards and beneficial use

requirements of the Clean Water Act will minimize planning and project impacts.

The analysis and planning efforts used in implementing ecosystem management on lands

administered by the BLM and Forest Service will comply with existing policies and laws

relating to American Indian off-reservation trust resources. The analysis will identify Indian

trust resources that would be effected, and identify potential conflicts between proposed

federal actions and treaty rights or tribal plans and policies. Consultation on a governmentto-government basis will be conducted early in the planning process with any effected tribes.

Conflicts will be resolved consistent with the Federal Government's trust responsibilities.
References/Index/Glossary F-1

F. References, Index, Glossary

References

Allen, H.L.; Dixon, K.R.; Knutsen, K.L. 1989. Cooperative administrative study to monitor

spotted owl management areas in national forests in Washington. Olympia, WA:

Washington Department of Wildlife.

Carey, A.B.; Reid, J.A.; Horton, S.P. 1990. Spotted owl home range and habitat use in

southern Oregon coast ranges. Journal of Wildlife Management 54:11-17.

Forsman, E.D.; Meslow, E.C. 1985. Old-growth forest retention for spotted owls-how much

do they need? Pages 58-59 in: Gutiérrez, R.J.; Carey, A.B., eds. Ecology and

management of the spotted owl in the Pacific Northwest. GTR-PNW-185. Portland, OR:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range

Experiment Station.

Hays, D.W.; Allen, H.L.; Egtvedt, L.H. 1989. Spotted owl surveys of randomly selected

transects in Washington. Olympia, WA: Washington Department of Wildlife, Wildlife

Management, Nongame Section.

Johnson, K.N.; Franklin, J.F.; Thomas, J.W.; Gordon, J. 1991. Alternatives for management

of late-successional forests of the Pacific Northwest. A report to the Agriculture

Committee and the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee of the U.S. House of

Representatives. 59 p.

Paton, P.W.C; Zabel, C.J.; Gingham, B. [and others]. 1990. Examination of home range size

and habitat use of the northern spotted owl in the Klamath Province. Arcata, CA: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range

Experiment Station.

Solis, D.M. 1983. Summer habitat ecology of spotted owls in northwestern California.

Arcata, CA: Humboldt State University. 168 p. M.S. thesis.

Thomas, J.W.; Forsman, E.D.; Lint, J.B., [and others]. 1990. A conservation strategy for the

northern spotted owl: a report of the Interagency Scientific Committee to address the

conservation of the northern spotted owl. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and

Wildlife Service, and National Park Service. 427 p.

USDI. 1992 [unpublished]. Final draft recovery plan for the northern spotted owl. Portland,

OR: U.S. Department of the Interior. 2 vols.
References/Index/Glossary F-2

Index

Adaptive Management: E-3, E-12 

Adaptive Management Areas: A-4, C-3, C-12, D-1, E-6

Administratively Withdrawn Areas: A-4, C-3, C-29

American Indian: C-16, E-9

Aquatic Conservation Strategy: B-9, C-30

Bald Eagle: C-11

Bats: C-43, D-10

Coarse Woody Debris: C-40

Congressionally Reserved Areas: A-4, C-8

Consultation: A-2, E-21

Current Plans and Draft Plan Preferred Alternatives: A-2, C-2, C-29, C-45

Designated Areas: A-4

Fire Management: C-17, C-35, C-44, C-48, D-8, D-11

Green Tree Retention: C-3, C-41

Intermittent Stream: B-14, C-31

Key Watersheds: A-5, B-18, C-7, E-6 

Lands and Minerals: C-17, C-34, C-36

Late-Successional Reserves: A-4, B-4, C-3, C-9, C-11, E-5

Laws, priority of: A-6, C-1

Managed Late-Successional Areas: A-4, C-3, C-22

Managed Pair Areas: C-23-25

Marbled Murrelet:C-3, C-10, C-12

Marbled Murrelet Zone: A-6, C-10

Matrix: A-5, C-39, E-5

Maps: A-6

Monitoring: B-32, D-7, E-1C E-12, E-16

Planning Area: A-1

Protection Buffers: C-3, C-11, C-19, C-23, C-26, C-45

Provinces: A-3, E-18

Range/grazing: C-6, C-17, C-33

Recreation Resources: C-6, C-18, C-34

Regional Ecosystem Office: C-4, C-12, C-13, C-29, E-16

Regional Interagency Executive Committee: E-16

Research: C-4, C-18, C-38, D-7, E-3, E-16

Research Natural Areas: C-11

Reserved Pair Areas: D-16

Restoration (see Watershed Restoration)
References/Index/Glossary F-3

Rights-of-way: C-19

Riparian Reserves: A-5, B-12, C-30, E-5

Riparian Reserve Widths: C-30

Roadless Areas: B-19, C-7

Roads: B-19, B-31, C-7, C-16, C-32

Salvage: C-13

Soil Disturbance: C-44, D-11

Special Forest Products: C-18

Spotted Owl Activity Center: C-3, C-10, C-45

Standards and Guidelines hierarchy: A-6, C-1, C-22, D-9

Timber Harvest/silviculture: B-5, C-12, C-26, C-31, C-39, D-8, D-11

Unstable Areas: C-31

Watershed Analysis: B-20, C-3, C-7, E-4, E-6, E-20

Watershed Restoration: B-30, C-7

Wetlands: B-16
References/Index/Glossary F-4

Glossary

Selected terms important to the understanding of the standards and guidelines and not

otherwise defined within these standards and guidelines. Additional glossary terms are

included with the Final SEIS for these standards and guidelines.

Known Pairs or Resident Singles [owls] - Northern spotted owl activity centers identified as

of January 1, 1994.

Local Knowledge - Refers to the planning unit level. Retaining administratively withdrawn

areas based on "local knowledge" is a Forest Plan or District Resource Management Plan-level

decision.

LS/OG 1s and 2s - Most significant old-growth, and significant old-growth, as mapped by

the Scientific Panel on Late-Successional Forest Ecosystems, Johnson et. al. 1991, and

maintained in the electronic data base for these standards and guidelines (see Section A). 

These are mapped units, and therefore do not change over time.

Coarse Woody Debris (CWD) - Portion of a tree that has fallen or been cut and left in the

woods. Usually refers to pieces at least 20 inches in diameter. FEMAT

Fish-Bearing Streams - Any stream containing any species of fish for any period of time.

Green Tree Retention - A stand management practice in which live trees as well as snags and

large down wood are left as biological legacies within harvest units to provide habitat

components over the next management cycle.

Old-Growth Forest - A forest stand usually at least 180-220 years old with moderate to high

canopy closure; a multilayered, multispecies canopy dominated by large overstory trees; high

incidence of large trees, some with broken tops and other indications of old and decaying

wood (decadence); numerous large snags; and heavy accumulations of wood, including large

logs on the ground. FEMAT

Spotted Owl Additions - Areas mapped by the Scientific Panel on Late-Successional Forest

Ecosystems that when added to LS/OG 1s, provided a level of protection for spotted owls

comparable to that of the Interagency Scientific Committee's 1990 Conservation Strategy for

the Northern Spotted Owl.

Standards and Guidelines - The rules and limits governing actions, and the principles

specifying the environmental conditions or levels to be achieved and maintained.

Regional Ecosystem Office - Although the standards and guidelines refer to the Regional

Ecosystem Office for reviews and other actions, it is understood that the Regional Ecosystem

Office typically recommends to the Regional Interagency Executive Committee who has

responsibility for the decisions. These groups and their responsibilities are described in

Section E of these standards and guidelines and in the Memorandum of Understanding

included in Appendix E of the Final SEIS.